The United States remained the world’s largest services market and was the world’s leading exporter and importer of services in 2023*, reports the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) in its new publication, Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2025 Annual Report. The U.S. services sector also continued to be the largest sector of the U.S. economy. 

The USITC, an independent, nonpartisan, factfinding federal agency, compiles the report annually. Each year’s report presents a qualitative and quantitative overview of U.S. trade in services and highlights some of the services sectors and geographic markets that significantly contribute to recent services trade performance.

This year’s report focuses on trade in professional services, including accounting and auditing, advertising, architecture and engineering, education, legal, and management consulting services. The report includes a special topic section on research and development services, as well as two thematic chapters. 

• The first thematic chapter focuses on how skills gaps and the introduction of new technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), are affecting the competitiveness of professional services suppliers. 
• The second indicates how changing demographics, including aging and income growth, in advanced and emerging markets; businesses’ ongoing digitalization; and the move by many manufacturing firms to reorganize their supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic are driving demand for certain professional services after the pandemic.

In recent years, professional services suppliers, such as those listed below, have adopted new technologies to improve productivity, lower costs, and address increased constraints in skilled labor supply.

• Accounting and Auditing Services: Firms are using new technologies and outsourcing or offshoring to improve productivity and lower costs. Firms are reducing the cost of supplying these services by automating and importing lower-skilled tax and auditing functions, while driving revenue growth through higher-value advisory services.
• Architecture and Engineering Services: Firms have had difficulties in hiring and retaining skilled workers, and in response some are offering mentorship, internship opportunities, and flexible work schedules. New technologies like AI, building information modeling, and drone surveillance are increasingly used for design, risk assessment, 3D modeling, and other applications.
• Legal Services: New technologies have led to the growth of lower-priced and more technically sophisticated alternative legal services providers and legal technology companies. U.S. firms supplying legal services in foreign markets are using technology to increase efficiency but are also facing complex regulatory environments.

The demand for professional services in the following sectors reflects changing demographics and expanding digitalization.

• Advertising Services: This industry has seen a sharp decline in demand for linear television content and a sharp rise in demand for video streaming services content. Firms are also seeing growing demand for content developed for social media platforms, and increasingly use AI technologies to target consumers more effectively.
• Education Services: Many U.S. universities have sought to attract international students to boost declining domestic enrollments and offset funding shortfalls. The international branch campuses of some U.S. universities have struggled to enroll enough students or attract adequate financing, with many such campuses closing in recent years. 
• Management Consulting Services: Demand has been driven by the need for assistance in dealing with technological advancements and shifts in workplace habits, along with supply chain optimization and sustainability initiatives. Traditional consulting firms have been impacted by rising competition from IT firms, small niche companies, and freelance consulting platforms.

The USITC hosted its 18th annual services roundtable on October 30, 2024. The discussion, summarized in the report, focused on how widespread workforce gaps and aging demographics are affecting U.S. services industries, how some graduates of U.S. schools and universities are struggling to find employment within the first two years, and how AI is expected to augment or replace many tasks in professional services, among other topics.

Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2025 Annual Report (Inv. No. 332-605, USITC Publication 5643, July 2025) is available on the USITC website. An interactive dashboard supplements the report.

*The latest year available for cross-border services trade data is 2023; the latest year available for affiliate sales and purchases data is 2022.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) today released its second report on the economic impact on the United States of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) automotive rules of origin (ROOs), their operation and effects on the U.S. economy and U.S. competitiveness, and whether the rules remain relevant in light of technological changes in the United States.

The report, USMCA Automotive Rules of Origin: Economic Impact and Operation, 2025 Report, is required by section 202A(g)(2) of the USMCA Implementation Act (the Act) (19 U.S.C. § 4532(g)(2)). The Act requires the USITC, an independent, nonpartisan, factfinding federal agency, to submit five biennial reports to the President, the House Committee on Ways and Means, and the Senate Committee on Finance. The next three reports are due in 2027, 2029, and 2031. The first report was released in 2023.

The report’s Executive Summary contains detailed highlights of the Commission’s findings. Select findings are outlined below.

• The Commission’s economic modeling analysis indicated that the ROOs had concentrated effects on the U.S. automotive industry, and a negligible impact on the overall U.S. economy. 
  • The model estimated that the ROOs increased employment, production, revenue, capital expenditures, and profits for U.S. producers of parts and materials.
  • The model estimated that the ROOs slightly decreased employment, production, revenue, capital expenditures, inventories, and profits for U.S. producers of light vehicles. 
  • The model estimated that the ROOs reduced U.S. imports of light vehicles from Canada and Mexico, and increased imports from non-USMCA countries. In addition, the model indicated that the ROOs slightly increased the average price of light vehicles in the U.S. market.
• Three competitiveness factors for the automotive industry are the most likely to be affected by the ROOs: cost, investment, and product differentiation. 
  • The Commission survey found that most sourcing changes associated with meeting the ROOs resulted in an increase in production cost; however, some resulted in a decrease or no change to cost. 
  • Total investment in U.S. automotive manufacturing increased from $27.9 billion in 2019 to $87.8 billion in 2023, before declining to $34.1 billion in 2024. This change in investment is only partially attributable to the ROOs, though investments in parts manufacturing specifically are more likely to be ROOs-related. 
• Since the USMCA took effect on July 1, 2020, the U.S. market share for vehicle sales and parts consumption in the United States remained relatively unchanged. However, other factors show signs of changes in competitiveness; U.S. motor vehicle production has increased since 2020, but still falls short of 2019 levels. Conversely, U.S. parts production also increased, especially for certain core parts, and exceeds 2019 levels. In both cases, these changes are at least partially attributable to the ROOs, according to Commission modeling.
• There were mixed signs of changes in U.S. competitiveness in other USMCA countries since the USMCA entered into force. There is little change in U.S. vehicle market share in Canada and Mexico. Meanwhile, the import share of U.S. parts has increased in Canada but decreased in Mexico. In non-USMCA markets, the U.S. share of light vehicle exported to those markets remained relatively unchanged from 2019 to 2024.
• Other individual factors­­—the Inflation Reduction Act, labor strikes, macroeconomic conditions, and more—had a greater impact on the U.S. automotive industry. Nonetheless, no single factor was more impactful than the ROOs.

This report also identified several technological changes in the United States that have created a divergence related to the tariff classification or tariff treatment of similar goods in the USMCA automotive ROOs. Technological changes covered in the Commission’s 2023 report that continue to create divergences include new production processes related to aluminum vehicle bodies and increased production of electric pickup trucks.

In addition to these technologies, this report identifies components and processes related to the production of electric vehicles, such as e-axles and new battery chemistries, that create more tariff classification or tariff treatment divergences.

USMCA Automotive Rules of Origin: Economic Impact and Operation, 2025 Report (Investigation No. 332-600, USITC Publication 5642, July 2025) is available on the USITC website. Supplementing the second release of the report is an online dashboard that presents U.S. automotive trade data in an interactive format, and is available on the Commission's website.

 

About factfinding investigations: USITC general factfinding investigations, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs, trade, and competitiveness and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) is undertaking a new factfinding investigation that will examine the global nonfat milk solids market and the export competitiveness of the nonfat milk solids industries in the United States and other major suppliers, such as Australia, Canada, select EU member states, and New Zealand.

This investigation, Nonfat Milk Solids: Competitive Conditions for the United States and Major Foreign Suppliers (Investigation No. 332-607), was requested by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) in a letter received on April 23, 2025.

As requested, the USITC, an independent, nonpartisan federal agency, will prepare a public report that will provide, to the extent practicable:

• An overview of the global market for products containing high levels of nonfat milk solids in their various forms, including such factors as product end uses, consumption, production, and trade.
   
• Profiles of the industries producing and exporting products containing high levels of nonfat milk solids in the United States, Australia, Canada, select EU member states, New Zealand, and other countries as may be relevant, including information about domestic production, consumption, and export trends in these countries.
   
• A comparison of the competitive strengths and weaknesses of producers and exporters of nonfat milk solids products from the United States and other major exporting countries, focusing on factors affecting delivered costs, product differentiation, and reliability of supply, as well as government policies and programs that directly or indirectly affect the production and exports of nonfat milk solids products from these countries.
   
• An overview of the competitiveness of U.S. nonfat milk solids products relative to exports from the highlighted countries both in the U.S. market and in third-country markets. 

The report will focus on the 2020-2024 period. The USITC expects to submit its report to USTR by March 23, 2026.

The USITC will hold a public hearing in connection with the investigation at 9:30 a.m. on July 28, 2025. A link to the hearing will be posted on the Commission’s website. Submit requests to appear at the hearing no later than 5:15 p.m. on July 14, 2025, with the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW, Washington, DC 20436. See below for important information about filing a request to appear at a USITC hearing.

The USITC also welcomes written submissions for the record. Written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission and should be submitted no later than 5:15 p.m. on October 14, 2025. All written submissions, except for confidential business information, will be available for public review. See below for important information about the filing of written submissions for USITC investigations.

FILING DOCUMENTS ONLINE: All filings to appear at the hearing and written submissions must be made through the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS). The USITC will not accept in-person, paper-based filings, or paper copies of electronic filings. If you have questions about electronic filing, contact the Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division (EDIS3Help@usitc.gov) or consult the Commission’s Handbook on Filing Procedures.

Further information on the scope of the investigation is available in the USITC’s notice of investigation, dated May 20, 2025, which you can also download from the USITC website or obtain by contacting the Office of the Secretary at commissionhearings@usitc.gov.

 

ABOUT FACTFINDING INVESTIGATIONS: USITC general factfinding investigations, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs, trade and competitiveness and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) today released a report on the competitiveness of the rice industries in the United States and other major producing and exporting countries. 

The report, Rice: Global Competitiveness and Impacts on Trade and the U.S. Industry (Inv. No. 332-603), was requested by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means (Committee) in a letter received on February 5, 2024. The Committee requested that the Commission conduct an investigation and produce a report that updates the findings of a USITC report on rice submitted to the Committee in 2015.

The new report, focused primarily on changes to the rice industry during from 2018 through 2023, provides information on recent developments in the rice industry in the United States, as well as Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Paraguay, Thailand, Uruguay and Vietnam. In addition, the report:

• Compares the competitive strengths and weaknesses of the major exporters.
• Provides a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the impact of government policies and programs on the U.S. rice industry and food security in developing countries.
• Describes the effects of exports from major producing and exporting countries on the U.S. industry.

Major Findings of the Investigation

• A small share of rice production is traded internationally, and rice exports are concentrated among a small number of exporters. India is the largest exporter. The United States supplies 1 percent of global production and 5 percent of global exports.
   
• Rice is a staple food for more than half of the world’s population and plays an important cultural, economic and food security role for many countries. As a result, there is significant government intervention in the rice industry, including public stockholding, consumer and producer subsidies, policies that encourage production and trade policies.
   
• Global events between 2018 and 2023 triggered price fluctuations in the rice industry. These events include:
  • The COVID-19 pandemic.
  • India’s export restrictions.
  • Spikes in transportation and input costs.
  • Climate- and weather-related disruptions such as droughts, floods and saltwater intrusion.
     
• Differences in production costs across countries affect the competitiveness of major rice producers. Producers with low production costs can offer lower prices, which makes their exports more competitive. Producers with high production costs often cannot compete in price-sensitive markets if they do not have other advantages such as product differentiation or tariff preferences. India, Pakistan and Vietnam had some of the lowest production costs; the United States, Brazil, China and Indonesia had some of the highest.
   
• According to the Commission’s economic modeling, greater market access would increase U.S. rice exports. Simulations show that the removal of all import tariffs, both U.S. and foreign, would have a net positive effect on U.S. rice production and exports. The removal of such tariffs would cause U.S. exports to rise more than 40 percent from their baseline 2023 level. The Commission’s economic modeling also shows potential gains to U.S. rice exports from other policies modeled, such as an increase in Japan’s tariff-rate quota. 

Rice: Global Competitiveness and Impacts on Trade and the U.S. Industry (Inv. No. 332-603, USITC Publication 5600, March 2025) is available on the USITC website at https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5600.pdf.

About Factfinding Investigations

USITC general factfinding investigations, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs, trade and competitiveness and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons. 

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) today released a U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)-requested report that calculates the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensities of U.S. steel and aluminum industries. The report, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Intensities of the U.S. Steel and Aluminum Industries at the Product Level, was requested by the USTR in a letter received on June 5, 2023. 

USTR’s request letter asked the USITC to:

• Calculate the GHG emissions intensity of steel and aluminum produced in the United States by product category in 2022, with data on scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. 
• Describe the methodologies the USITC used to collect relevant information and calculate the emissions intensity estimates.
• Identify where emissions occur during manufacturing, with respect to the production stages and sourcing location of inputs. 

To gather data for the calculation of product-level emissions intensity estimates, the USITC surveyed all U.S. facilities that produced the steel and aluminum products covered under the section 232 investigation in 2022.

This report conveys the Commission’s factual findings and analyses. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in this report. 

Major Findings of the Investigation

The processes and inputs used in U.S. steel and aluminum production drive their emission intensities.

Semifinished Steel

The average emissions intensity estimate for U.S. carbon and other alloy semifinished steel was 1.02 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per metric ton of steel (mt CO2e/mt steel) in 2022.

• The emissions intensities estimates of U.S. carbon and alloy steel products are primarily influenced by two factors: 
  • The production pathway (the more emissions-intensive blast furnace and basic oxygen furnace, or BF-BOF, pathway, versus the electric arc furnace, or EAF, pathway) used to produce the semifinished steel, which is used as substrate in mill products.
  • The relative use of emissions-intensive upstream material inputs like pig iron and direct reduced iron.
• The average emissions intensity for U.S. stainless steel semifinished steel was 2.23 mt CO2e/mt steel in 2022. The emissions intensity of U.S. stainless steel products is mainly influenced by the reliance on emissions-intensive ferroalloy (an alloy of iron with a significant amount of one or more other elements, like chromium or nickel) inputs. All U.S. stainless semifinished steel-producing facilities reported operating an EAF. Therefore, variation in the production pathway does not drive emissions intensities for stainless steel.

Steel Mill Products

Average emissions intensities among carbon and alloy steel mill products ranged between 0.67 mt CO2e/mt steel for hot-worked long products and 2.17 mt CO2e/mt steel for coated flat products. Average emissions intensities among stainless steel mill products ranged between 2.31 mt CO2e/mt steel for hot-rolled flat and 4.55 mt CO2e/mt steel for wire.

• Further downstream steel products generally had higher emissions intensities than less-processed steel products. This is because each subsequent process in steel production involves more steps and therefore more opportunities for emissions.
• For carbon and alloy steel mill products, the most emissions-intensive processes in the U.S. steel industry occur during the upstream production of pig iron and semifinished steel. The additional subprocesses used to produce downstream products are also significant, however, leading to meaningful differences in emissions intensities across the carbon and alloy steel product categories.
• Stainless steel mill products are more emissions intensive than their carbon and alloy steel counterparts. This is due to the heavier use of energy and ferroalloys associated with stainless steel production.

Unwrought Aluminum

The average emissions intensity for all U.S. unwrought aluminum is 3.46 mt CO2e/mt aluminum. U.S. unwrought aluminum includes primary aluminum, which is produced from alumina at smelters using electrolysis, and secondary aluminum, which is produced by remelting primary aluminum and scrap-based inputs. Most U.S. unwrought production, in terms of volume and number of facilities, is of secondary unwrought aluminum.

• The average emissions intensity for U.S. primary unwrought aluminum is 14.52 mt CO2e/mt aluminum. The main drivers of the emissions intensity of primary unwrought aluminum are:
  • The large quantities of electricity needed for electrolysis. 
  • The fuel mix used to generate high quantities of the necessary electricity.
• The average emissions intensity for U.S. secondary unwrought aluminum is 2.46 mt CO2e/mt aluminum. Production of secondary unwrought aluminum is much less energy intensive, using a fraction of the electricity of primary unwrought production. The emissions intensity of secondary unwrought aluminum is influenced by the amount of primary unwrought aluminum versus scrap used as inputs and, to a lesser extent, by the efficiency of the furnaces used to heat the metal.

Wrought Aluminum

The average emissions intensities for U.S. wrought aluminum products ranged from 4.97 mt CO2e/mt aluminum for plates, sheets and strip, to 8.66 mt CO2e/mt aluminum for foil. The two main factors that drive the differences in emissions intensities between wrought product categories are the:

• Amount of primary versus secondary unwrought aluminum used. 
• Energy intensity of the various manufacturing processes.

Note: The Commission’s emissions intensity estimates for both steel and aluminum are calculated assuming that scrap inputs have zero embedded emissions.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Intensities of the U.S. Steel and Aluminum Industries at the Product Level (Investigation No. 332-598, USITC Publication 5584, February 2025) is available on the USITC website.

About Factfinding Investigations

USITC general factfinding investigations culminating in a report, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs, trade and competitiveness and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today released a report about the export competitiveness of certain apparel suppliers to the United States. This report, Apparel: Export Competitiveness of Certain Foreign Suppliers to the United States (Inv. No. 332-602), was requested by the U.S. Trade Representative in a letter received on December 20, 2023.

The USITC, an independent, nonpartisan federal agency, examined the export competitiveness of the apparel industries in Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, and prepared a public report that includes:

• a comparison of the relative U.S. market shares held by Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, as well as an analysis of changing patterns in apparel trade;
• a review of general literature on the key determinants driving export competitiveness in the global apparel industry; 
• a discussion of factors affecting export competitiveness in the apparel sector; and
• country-specific profiles of the apparel industries in the above-listed countries, including information on investment, vertical integration, duty-free access to the U.S. market, wages and labor productivity, and sourcing of inputs, as well as an assessment of the export competitiveness of each country in the U.S. market.

Key findings:

• The United States is the largest single-country apparel importer in the world. In 2023, U.S. imports of apparel totaled $79.3 billion, with the majority sourced from Asia. 
• Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan are notable suppliers to the United States—ranking among the top 10 U.S. import suppliers in 2023—and are also significant exporters in the global market. These five countries accounted for a combined 27.0 percent of U.S. apparel imports in 2023.
• The market shares of major U.S. suppliers changed significantly during 2013–23. The share of imports from China, the largest exporter to the United States, fell during the period, while the market shares of other top suppliers such as Vietnam, Bangladesh, Cambodia, and Pakistan increased.
• Although Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan differ with respect to the factors of competitiveness that make them attractive to U.S. brands and retailers, they share certain similarities and are all reportedly competitive on sourcing costs. Additional key highlights concerning the five profiled countries are as follows: 
  • As the second-largest apparel exporter in the world, Bangladesh has extensive capabilities in apparel manufacturing and specializes in bulk orders of basic garments. Factors such as low labor costs, relatively low input costs, and duty-free access to large destination markets outside of the United States contribute to Bangladesh’s cost competitiveness.
  • Foreign direct investment drives Cambodia’s export-oriented apparel industry with Cambodia focused on cut, make, and trim production using imports of upstream materials. Cambodia’s apparel industry is viewed as an attractive alternative to sourcing from China and its reputation for social responsibility contributes to its competitiveness.
  • India has a long history in textiles and apparel production and remains a steady source of U.S. imports. Quality and detailed finishing contribute to the competitiveness of India’s apparel production, which is supported by a highly vertically integrated apparel industry.
  • A major supplier of a wide variety of clothing, Indonesia exports the majority of its apparel to the United States. While it is a relatively high-cost source, Indonesia produces high-value, complex garments such as business attire, outdoor apparel, and athletic wear which contributes to its competitiveness.
  • Pakistan’s cotton sector supports the country’s apparel industry, which is noted for production of high-quality denim. Vertical integration and access to domestic cotton are competitive strengths, but buyers cite geopolitical risk as a concern.

Apparel: Export Competitiveness of Certain Foreign Suppliers to the United States (Inv. No. 332-602, USITC Publication 5543, August 2024) is available on the USITC website at: https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5543.pdf. 

 

About factfinding investigations: USITC general factfinding investigations, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs, trade, and competitiveness and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

The U.S. International Commission (USITC) today released a report on the operation of the U.S. Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) program and similar programs (FTZ-type programs) in Canada and Mexico, as well as the impacts of these programs on employment and the cost-competitiveness of products of firms operating in U.S. FTZs. 

The investigation, Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs): Effects of FTZ Policies and Practices on U.S. Firms Operating in U.S. FTZs and Under Similar Programs in Canada and Mexico, was requested by the U.S. Trade Representative in a letter received on December 14, 2021. 

As requested, the USITC, an independent, nonpartisan, factfinding federal agency, reported on the operations of U.S. FTZs and FTZ-type programs, and the effects of relevant policies and practices on employment and the cost-competitiveness of goods produced in U.S. FTZs. As part of its investigation, the Commission conducted a survey of firms producing in U.S. FTZs and used the questionnaire results in its quantitative and qualitative analyses. Per the request, the report includes: 

• An overview of economic activity in FTZs operating in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, including but not limited to employment, leading sectors, shipments, exports, and foreign direct investment in FTZs;
• An overview of current FTZ policies and practices in the United States, Canada, and Mexico;
• An analysis of the cost-competitiveness effects of current FTZ policies and practices in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, including effects on relative production costs and U.S. employment; and
• Case studies on the impact of U.S. FTZs and FTZ-type programs on the automotive, upholstered furniture manufacturing, petroleum refining, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and warehousing and distribution industries. 

Detailed highlights of the Commission's findings can be found in the report's Executive Summary. 

Findings include:

• Central features of the U.S. FTZ program and FTZ-type programs in Canada and Mexico are the special tariff treatments, principally duty deferral, duty exemption, duty reduction, and duty drawback. 
• The cost-competitiveness effects of the U.S. FTZ program and FTZ-type programs in Canada and Mexico are impacted by multiple factors, including the design of the programs, national tariff regimes and applicable rates of duty, other trade policies, and material sourcing and destination markets for firms’ shipments. 
• Canada and Mexico carried out substantial unilateral tariff reductions since the early 1990s (coinciding with the signature and implementation of NAFTA) which impact the attractiveness and usage of their respective FTZ-type programs. Other examples of policies that affect the programs are the restrictions in the North American Free Trade Agreement and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on the use of drawback and duty exemption for goods produced in FTZs and exported to USMCA partner countries. Such restrictions limit duty benefits available under U.S. FTZs and FTZ-type programs in Canada and Mexico.
• Overall, U.S FTZs improve cost-competitiveness of U.S. firms primarily through duty reduction on shipments that make customs entry in the United States and duty exemption on direct export shipments from U.S. FTZs. Firms producing in FTZs experienced duty cost savings of $1.2 billion in 2021 using these two features of U.S. FTZs. 
• Although most firms producing in U.S. FTZs experience net cost savings through use of the program, fewer firms consider their FTZ use to be a factor causing increases in investment, output, or employment in the United States. 
• The reasons for and benefits of using the programs vary across sectors. In certain sectors, such as the automotive industry, firms cannot use the U.S. FTZ program to reduce their duty costs to zero due to the non-free normal trade relation (NTR) rates of duty applicable to automotive inputs and finished goods. This may put U.S. producers at a competitive disadvantage relative to firms operating in Canada and Mexico due to free rates of duty applicable to most inputs (in the case of Canada) or to the particular features of the FTZ-type programs (in the case of Mexico).

Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs): Effects of FTZ Policies and Practices on U.S. Firms Operating in U.S. FTZs and Under Similar Programs in Canada and Mexico (Investigation No. 332-588, USITC Publication 5423, April 2023) is available on the USITC’s website at https://usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5423.pdf.

 

 

About factfinding investigations: USITC general factfinding investigations, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs, trade, and competitiveness and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) is undertaking a new factfinding investigation that will examine the impact of tariffs on U.S. imports under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. 1862) and section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2232) in effect as of March 15, 2022, as reflected in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. The Commission’s report will provide detailed information on U.S. trade, production, and prices in the industries directly and most affected by these tariffs.

The Commission was directed to conduct this investigation, Economic Impact of Section 232 and 301 Tariffs on U.S. Industries, Inv. 332-591, as part of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, which was signed into law on March 15, 2022.

As directed, the USITC, an independent, nonpartisan, federal agency, will prepare a public report. The report will provide, to the extent practicable:

• background information on the Section 232 and 301 tariffs and an overview of the tariffs that were in effect as of March 15, 2022; and
• an economic analysis of the impact of these tariffs on U.S. trade, production, and prices in the industries most affected by these tariffs.

The USITC expects to submit its report to Congress by March 15, 2023.

The USITC will hold a public hearing in connection with the investigation, beginning at 9:30 a.m. on July 21, 2022. Information about the hearing, including how to participate or observe, will be posted on the Commission’s website no later than June 21, 2022, at https://usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/what_we_are_working_on.htm. 

Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed no later than 5:15 p.m. on July 6, 2022 with the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.  See below for important information regarding filing a request to appear at a USITC hearing.

The USITC also welcomes written submissions for the record.  Written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission and should be submitted no later than 5:15 p.m. on August 24, 2022. All written submissions, except for confidential business information, will be available for public inspection.  See below for important information regarding the filing of written submissions for USITC investigations.

IMPORTANT:  All filings to appear at the hearing and written submissions must be made through the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov). No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding electronic filing should contact the Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division (EDIS3Help@USITC.gov), or consult the Commission’s Handbook on Filing Procedures.

Further information on the scope of the investigation is available in the USITC’s notice of investigation, dated May 5, 2022, which can be downloaded from the USITC Internet site (www.usitc.gov)  or may be obtained by contacting the Office of the Secretary at or may be obtained by contacting the Office of the Secretary at commissionhearings@usitc.gov.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) is undertaking a new factfinding investigation on U.S.-Haiti trade and the impact of U.S. trade preference programs on Haiti’s economy and workers. The Commission’s report will provide an overview of Haiti’s international trade since 1980, with special emphasis of the impact of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA), Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement (HOPE) Act of 2006, HOPE II in 2008, and the Haiti Economic Lift Program (HELP) in 2010, and the Trade Acts of 2000 and 2002 on Haiti’s trading relationship with the United States, Haiti’s economy, and workers.

The investigation, U.S.-Haiti Trade: Impact of U.S. Preference Programs on Haiti’s Economy and Workers, Inv. No. 332-590, was requested by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means (Committee) in a letter received on February 22, 2022. The Committee noted in its letter that the HOPE and HELP preference programs will expire on September 30, 2025.

As requested, the USITC, an independent, nonpartisan, factfinding federal agency, will prepare a public report for the Committee. The report will provide, to the extent practicable:

• an overview of the Haitian economy and its competitiveness;
• an examination of the role of U.S. preference programs in shaping Haiti’s economy; and
• case studies on goods currently and historically exported from Haiti such as apparel, tropical fruits, and sporting goods, including baseballs, softballs, and basketballs.

The USITC expects to submit its report to the Committee by December 22, 2022.

The USITC will hold a public hearing in connection with the investigation via an online video conference platform, beginning at 9:30 a.m. on May 26, 2022.  More detailed information about the hearing, including how to participate, will be posted on the Commission’s website no later than April 22, 2022, at https://usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/what_we_are_working_on.htm. 

Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed no later than 5:15 p.m. on May 4, 2022 with the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.  See below for important information regarding filing a request to appear at a USITC hearing.

The USITC also welcomes written submissions for the record.  Written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission and should be submitted no later than 5:15 p.m. on June 23, 2022. All written submissions, except for confidential business information, will be available for public inspection.  See below for important information regarding the filing of written submissions for USITC investigations.

IMPORTANT:  All filings to appear at the hearing and written submissions must be made through the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov). No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding electronic filing should contact the Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division (EDIS3Help@USITC.gov), or consult the Commission’s Handbook on Filing Procedures.

Further information on the scope of the investigation is available in the USITC’s notice of investigation, dated March 22, 2022, which can be downloaded from the USITC Internet site (www.usitc.gov) or may be obtained by contacting the Office of the Secretary at or may be obtained by contacting the Office of the Secretary at commissionhearings@usitc.gov.

About these investigations: USITC general factfinding investigations, such as these, cover matters related to tariffs or trade and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has released the first of two reports on foreign censorship policies and practices that affect U.S. businesses. 

The investigations, Foreign Censorship Part 1: Policies and Practices Affecting U.S. Businesses and Foreign Censorship Part 2: Trade and Economic Effects on U.S. Businesses, were requested by the Senate Committee on Finance in a letter received on April 8, 2021, modifying its earlier letter of January 4, 2021.

As requested, in the first report, the USITC, an independent, nonpartisan federal agency, identified and described various foreign censorship practices, with particular focus on examples that U.S. businesses cite as impeding trade or investment in key foreign markets.

The report includes:

• a description of the evolution of censorship and censorship-enabling policies and practices over the past five years in six key foreign markets: China, Russia, Turkey, Vietnam, India, and Indonesia; and
• a description of elements that entail extraterritorial censorship and the roles of governmental and nongovernmental actors in implementing and enforcing censorship policies and practices in these six key foreign markets.

Detailed information on the Commission's findings can be found in the report's Executive Summary.

Foreign Censorship, Part 1: Policies and Practices Affecting U.S. Businesses (Investigation No. 332-585, USITC publication 5244, December 2021) is available on the USITC's internet site at https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5244.pdf.

About these investigations: USITC general factfinding investigations, such as these, cover matters related to tariffs or trade and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

Subscribe to Section 332