USTR Greer Testifies Before House Ways And Means Committee: Tariff Exclusion Process Unlikely

On April 22, 2026, United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer testified in front of the House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means. “The Trump Administration's 2026 Trade Policy Agenda” session provided a comprehensive overview of the administration’s trade priorities, strategic utilization of tariffs and upcoming trade negotiations. Ambassador Greer’s testimony demonstrates that the Trump administration’s approach to trade policy and enforcement has remained largely unchanged since the first Trump administration.

The first Trump administration saw a significant expansion in the use of tariffs against imports. Two of the chief tools employed were Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Section 232 authorizes the president to impose tariffs and restrictions on imports that threaten the national security of the United States. During the first Trump administration, and continued under the Biden administration, Section 232 duties were primarily directed at imports of steel and aluminum products. The other tool, Section 301, gives the president the authority to impose tariffs and restrictions on imports of countries that unfairly burden, discriminate against, or violate the rights of American businesses. Section 301 tariffs under the first Trump administration primarily targeted $370 billion of Chinese imports. The current Trump administration is using both Section 232 and Section 301 to impose a host of new tariffs on additional industries and new countries. 

Following the initial imposition of Section 232 and Section 301 duties, the government created exclusion processes for some goods subject to the additional duties. Exclusions were typically short-term, product-specific and only granted if the products could not be manufactured in the United States. A Section 301 exclusion required demonstration that a product was only available in China. 

As emphasized by Ambassador Greer’s testimony, the second Trump administration has not been receptive to exclusion requests. In February 2025, the Trump administration announced that the Department of Commerce would no longer be accepting Section 232 exclusion requests for steel and aluminum products, and no new exclusions would be granted. The administration updated Section 232 duties on aluminum, steel and copper on April 2, 2026, and did not provide for an exclusion process. Additionally, the vast majority of Section 301 exclusions have been allowed to expire. The second Trump administration is not currently accepting any new Section 301 exclusion requests on goods from China, though they have, as a part of ongoing trade negotiations, extended by one year 178 pre-existing exclusions originally set to expire in November 2025. 

Ambassador Greer’s comments before the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee signal continued skepticism of the exclusion process. Responding to questions from committee members, Ambassador Greer testified that the Trump administration does not plan to create an exclusion process for goods subject to duties, such as Section 301 and Section 232 duties. Specifically, when asked by Congresswoman Judy Chu (D-CA) whether there will be a public exclusion process going forward, Ambassador Greer stated that he did not expect an exclusion process to be available for new Section 301 tariffs. In fact, in response to Congressman Max Miller’s (R-OH) request for a commitment from USTR, and ideally the Department of Commerce, to open exclusion processes for merchandise subject to Section 232 and Section 301 duties, Ambassador Greer refused to do so. He explained that President Trump did not support granting exclusions because they lessened pressure to reshore production to the United States. Reshoring production remains one of President Trump’s primary trade goals.

Rather, Ambassador Greer stated that future changes to Section 301 and Section 232 duties would first appear in the Federal Register and be subject to an open comment period. Interested parties seeking tariff adjustments are encouraged to use the public comment process when procedures are announced in the Federal Register, such as the recently published Procedures for Submissions by Certain Steel and Aluminum Producers Committing to New U.S. Steel or Aluminum Production To Obtain Tariff Adjustments Under Proclamation 10984. The comment process is designed to provide a public forum for all stakeholders to discuss the potential scope and impact of new tariffs prior to their imposition. Despite skepticism from some members of Congress, the administration feels confident that the comment process is sufficient for addressing concerns arising out of proposed additional duties. Ambassador Greer expects further opportunities to comment on the scope of investigations through the public comments process.

Ambassador Greer offered options to alleviate issues faced by importers. For example, the updated Section 232 duties on steel, aluminum, and copper announced on April 2, are designed to lessen the burden on imports of certain derivative metal articles. With respect to importers that may struggle without exclusions, Ambassador Greer noted that the Small Business Administration (SBA) has made loans available for companies to reshore production to the United States. He also pointed to an SBA portal aimed at pairing American producers with suppliers.

The hearing touched on a variety of other issues. 

The joint review process for the United States-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA) will start at the beginning of July, and aspects of it are expected to change. Ambassador Greer stated that the administration never planned to rubber stamp a USMCA renewal without addressing existing issues. One point of emphasis will be updating rules of origin. Ambassador Greer floated the idea of taking USMCA’s rules of origin for automobiles and expanding them to other products. Specifically, Ambassador Greer testified:

I support the USMCA, but President Trump is correct that we cannot just rubber stamp the status quo. As the July 1 Joint Review deadline nears, we must review the improvements that are needed to continue the agreement’s success and eliminate loopholes like this. We have also seen with USMCA how benefits can fail to materialize for American producers when trade agreements are not robustly enforced.

In general, Mexico has been more receptive to American proposals than Canada has. There is a possibility that USMCA could evolve into two separate bilateral agreements—one with Mexico and one with Canada—particularly if Canada continues to oppose rule changes.

Several committee members asked about US imports of critical minerals. Congresswoman Carole Miller (R-WV) asked if repealing the Jackson-Vanik amendment would open up critical minerals in Central Asia to American markets. Ambassador Greer agreed that removing the law would help investment, and noted that government agencies have had productive conversations with partners in Central Asia already regarding critical minerals. With respect to new critical mineral trade agreements, he explained that USTR is still drafting language, but pointed to existing deals with Japan and Mexico as examples. Ambassador Greer also clarified that USTR is considering deals for specific minerals, as opposed to all-encompassing critical mineral deals.

Both Committee members and Ambassador Greer expressed strong disapproval of foreign governments that have implemented or plan to implement Digital Service Taxes (DSTs) that target American companies. During questioning, Ambassador Greer indicated that the preferred solution is to negotiate away the DSTs, but the administration is open to applying Section 301 duties if those negotiations fail. 

The Trump administration has been using a variety of trade tools to implement its trade policy agenda. More tariffs under Section 232 and Section 301 are expected following the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the administration’s IEEPA tariffs. Buchanan’s team of international trade, customs and national security attorneys and government relations and international trade professionals is closely monitoring developments and is ready to help U.S. manufacturers with U.S. trade remedy laws, trade policy and all issues connected with Section 232 and Section 301 duties.