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) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of vanillin from China that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the government of China.

Status of proceedings, links to relevant documents, and more information about these investigations can be found at the Commission’s Investigations Database System (IDS).

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) today determined that revoking the existing antidumping order on imports of refined brown aluminum oxide from China would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determination, the existing order on imports of this product from China will remain in place. 

Chair Amy A. Karpel and Commissioners David S. Johanson and Jason E. Kearns voted in the affirmative. 

Today’s action comes under the five-year (sunset) review process required by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. See the attached page for background on these five-year (sunset) reviews.

The Commission’s public report, Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide from China (Inv. No. 731-TA-1022 (Fourth Review) USITC Publication 5645, July 2025) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the review.

The report will be available by July 31, 2025; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website. 

 

---

BACKGROUND

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act requires the Department of Commerce to revoke an antidumping or countervailing duty order, or terminate a suspension agreement, after five years unless the Department of Commerce and the USITC determine that revoking the order or terminating the suspension agreement would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies (Commerce) and of material injury (USITC) within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

The Commission’s institution notice in five-year reviews requests that interested parties file responses with the Commission concerning the likely effects of revoking the order under review as well as other information. Generally, within 95 days from institution, the Commission will determine whether the responses it has received reflect an adequate or inadequate level of interest in a full review. If responses to the USITC’s notice of institution are adequate, or if other circumstances warrant a full review, the Commission conducts a full review, which includes a public hearing and issuance of questionnaires.

The Commission generally does not hold a hearing or conduct further investigative activities in expedited reviews.  Commissioners base their injury determination in expedited reviews on the facts available, including the Commission’s prior injury and review determinations, responses received to its notice of institution, data collected by staff in connection with the reviews, and information provided by the Department of Commerce.

The five-year (sunset) review concerning Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide from China was instituted on February 3, 2025.

On May 9, 2025, the Commission determined to conduct an expedited five-year review. Chair Amy A. Karpel and Commissioner Jason E. Kearns concluded that the domestic interested party group responses were adequate, and the respondent interested party group responses were inadequate, and voted for an expedited review. Commissioner David S. Johanson concluded that the domestic interested party group responses were adequate, and the respondent interested party group responses were inadequate, and voted for a full review. 

A record of the Commission’s vote to conduct expedited reviews is available on the investigations page for  Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide from China; Inv. No. 731-TA-1022 (Fourth Review). 

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) voted to institute an investigation of certain Wi-Fi routers, Wi-Fi devices, mesh Wi-Fi network devices and components thereof. The products at issue in the investigation are described in the Commission’s notice of investigation.

The investigation is based on a complaint filed on behalf of Estelgia, LLC of Dover, Del., on May 16, 2025. A letter supplementing the complaint was filed on June 3, 2025. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain Wi-Fi routers, Wi-Fi devices, mesh Wi-Fi network devices and components thereof that infringe patents asserted by the complainant. The complainant requests that the USITC issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders. 

The USITC has identified the following respondents in this investigation:

• ASUStek Computer Inc., Taipei City, Taiwan
• ASUS Computer International, Fremont, Calif.
• D-Link Corporation, Taipei, Taiwan
• D-Link Systems, Inc., Irvine, Calif.
• Linksys Holdings, Inc., Irvine, Calif.
• Linksys USA, Inc., Irvine, Calif.
• Plume Design Inc., Palo Alto, Calif.

By instituting this investigation (337-TA-1454), the USITC has not yet made any decision on the merits of the case. The USITC’s Chief Administrative Law Judge will assign the case to one of the USITC’s administrative law judges (ALJ), who will schedule and hold an evidentiary hearing. The ALJ will make an initial determination as to whether there is a violation of section 337; that initial determination is subject to review by the Commission. 

The USITC will make a final determination in the investigation at the earliest practicable time. Within 45 days after institution of the investigation, the USITC will set a target date for completing the investigation. USITC remedial orders in section 337 cases are effective when issued and become final 60 days after issuance unless disapproved for policy reasons by the U.S. Trade Representative within that 60-day period.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) voted to institute an investigation of certain boiler protection for absorption refrigeration systems and components thereof. The products at issue in the investigation are described in the Commission’s notice of investigation.

The investigation is based on a complaint filed on behalf of ARPC LLC and Paul Unmack of Butte, Montana, on May 14, 2025. A supplement was filed on May 23, 2025. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain boiler protection for absorption refrigeration systems and components thereof that infringe the patent asserted by the complainant. 

The complainant requests that the USITC issue a general exclusion order, or in the alternative a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders. 

The USITC has identified the following respondents in this investigation:

• Kuofanghenanmaoyiyouxiangongsi, Zheng Zhou, China
• Wuhujiaoxiangdianzishangwuyouxiangongsi, Wu Hu, China
• Wang Hai Ping, Guang Zhou China
• Shenzhenshi Xiangfan Xinxizixun Youxiangongsi, Shen Zhen, China
• Ruianshichensumaoyiyouxiangongsi, Zhe Jiang, China
• Qingyuannuozedianzishangwuyouxianzerengongsi, GuangDong, China
• Wuhu Tianhao e-commerce Co., Ltd, An Hu, China
• shen zhen shi hong kang da ke ji you xian gong si, Guang Dong, China
• guangzhou yingpeng dianzi shangwu youxiangongsi, Guang Dong, China
• shen zhen shi xing han xing dian zi shang wu you xian gong si, Guang Dong, China

By instituting this investigation (337-TA-1453), the USITC has not yet made any decision on the merits of the case. The USITC’s Chief Administrative Law Judge will assign the case to one of the USITC’s administrative law judges (ALJ), who will schedule and hold an evidentiary hearing. The ALJ will make an initial determination as to whether there is a violation of section 337; that initial determination is subject to review by the Commission. 

The USITC will make a final determination in the investigation at the earliest practicable time. Within 45 days after institution of the investigation, the USITC will set a target date for completing the investigation. USITC remedial orders in section 337 cases are effective when issued and become final 60 days after issuance unless disapproved for policy reasons by the U.S. Trade Representative within that 60-day period.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) voted to institute an investigation of certain ink cartridges and components thereof II. The products at issue in the investigation are described in the Commission’s notice of investigation.

The investigation is based on a complaint filed on behalf of Epson Portland, Inc. of Hillsboro, Ore.; Epson America, Inc. of Los Alamitos, Calif.; and Seiko Epson Corporation of Japan on May 13, 2025. Supplements to the complaint were filed on May 19 and 30, 2025, and June 3, 2025. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain ink cartridges and components thereof II that infringe patents asserted by the complainants. 

The complainants request that the USITC issue a general exclusion order, or in the alternative a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders. 

The USITC has identified the following respondents in this investigation:

• Dongguan Ocbestjet Digital Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a Ocbestjet, Guangdong, China
• Ocbestjet Printer Consumables (HK) Co., Ltd. d/b/a Ocbestjet, Hong Kong
• Tatrix International China Co., Ltd., Guangdong, China
• Luozhi Trading Co., Ltd., Guangdong, China
• Shenzhen Hongxinyuan E-Commerce Co., Ltd. d/b/a Jianjai, d/b/a Vi-US, Guangdong, China
• Shenzhen Kaizhen Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a PayForLess, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Zhenyang Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Oinkwere, Guangdong, China
• Shangrao Shixuan E-Commerce Co., Ltd. d/b/a Inkgo, Jiangxi, China
• Zhuhai Hengyunda Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Upriin, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Rongtaida Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Hookink, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Shi Wei Tai Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Ondula-A, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Yixing Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Greenjob USSOP, Guangdong, China
• Mei Jin Technology HK Co. d/b/a YBFeir, d/b/a MJing, Hong Kong
• ZhuHai MeiJiAn Trading Co., Ltd. d/b/a HaloFox, Guangdong, China 
• Qiong Wang d/b/a 7-magic, Guangdong, China
• Shen Zhen Sailing Technology Limited d/b/a Triple-Color, Shenzhen, China
• Zhuhai Shuofeng E-commerce Co., Ltd. d/b/a super-ink-club, Guangdong, China 
• Zhuhai Bowang Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a office-print-club, Guangdong, China
• Mountain Peak, Inc. d/b/a/ Billiontree Technology USA, Inc., d/b/a Toner Kingdom, City of Industry, Calif.
• Straightouttaink, LP, d/b/a discountinkllc, d/b/a einkshop2014, d/b/a Inkpro, d/b/a inkprousa, San Jose, Calif.

By instituting this investigation (337-TA-1452), the USITC has not yet made any decision on the merits of the case. The USITC’s Chief Administrative Law Judge will assign the case to one of the USITC’s administrative law judges (ALJ), who will schedule and hold an evidentiary hearing. The ALJ will make an initial determination as to whether there is a violation of section 337; that initial determination is subject to review by the Commission. 

The USITC will make a final determination in the investigation at the earliest practicable time. Within 45 days after institution of the investigation, the USITC will set a target date for completing the investigation. USITC remedial orders in section 337 cases are effective when issued and become final 60 days after issuance unless disapproved for policy reasons by the U.S. Trade Representative within that 60-day period.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) voted to institute an investigation of certain ink cartridges and components thereof I. The products at issue in the investigation are described in the Commission’s notice of investigation.

The investigation is based on a complaint filed on behalf of Epson Portland Inc. of Hillsboro, Ore.; Epson America, Inc. of Los Alamitos, Calif.; and Seiko Epson Corporation of Japan on May 13, 2025. Supplements to the complaint were filed on May 19 and 30, 2025, and June 3, 2025. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain ink cartridges and components thereof that infringe patents asserted by the complainants. 

The complainants request that the USITC issue a general exclusion order, or in the alternative a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders. 

The USITC has identified the following respondents in this investigation:

• Dongguan Ocbestjet Digital Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a Ocbestjet, Guangdong, China
• Ocbestjet Printer Consumables (HK) Co., Ltd. d/b/a Ocbestjet, Hong Kong, China
• Tatrix International China Co., Ltd., Guandong, China
• Luozhi Trading Co., Ltd., Guandong, China
• Shenzhen Hongxinyuan E-Commerce Co., Ltd. d/b/a Jianjai, d/b/a Vi-US, Guandong, China
• Shenzhen Kaizhen Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a PayForLess, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Zhenyang Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Oinkwere, Guangdong, China
• Shangrao Shixuan E-Commerce Co., Ltd. d/b/a Inkgo, Jiangxi, China
• Zhuhai Hengyunda Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Upriin, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Rongtaida Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Hookink, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Shi Wei Tai Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Ondula-A, Guangdong, China
• Zhuhai Yixing Electronics Co., Ltd. d/b/a Greenjob USSOP, Guangdong, China
• Mei Jin Technology HK Co. d/b/a YBFeir, d/b/a MJing, Hong Kong
• ZhuHai MeiJiAn Trading Co., Ltd. d/b/a HaloFox, Guangdong, China 
• Qiong Wang d/b/a 7-magic, Guangdong, China
• Shen Zhen Sailing Technology Limited d/b/a Triple-Color, Shenzhen, China
• Zhuhai Shuofeng E-commerce Co., Ltd. d/b/a super-ink-club, Guangdong, China 
• Zhuhai Bowang Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a office-print-club, Guangdong, China
• Mountain Peak, Inc. d/b/a/ Billiontree Technology USA, Inc., d/b/a Toner Kingdom, City of Industry, Calif.
• Straightouttaink, LP, d/b/a discountinkllc, d/b/a einkshop2014, d/b/a Inkpro, d/b/a inkprousa, San Jose, Calif.

By instituting this investigation (337-TA-1451), the USITC has not yet made any decision on the merits of the case. The USITC’s Chief Administrative Law Judge will assign the case to one of the USITC’s administrative law judges (ALJ), who will schedule and hold an evidentiary hearing. The ALJ will make an initial determination as to whether there is a violation of section 337; that initial determination is subject to review by the Commission. 

The USITC will make a final determination in the investigation at the earliest practicable time. Within 45 days after institution of the investigation, the USITC will set a target date for completing the investigation. USITC remedial orders in section 337 cases are effective when issued and become final 60 days after issuance unless disapproved for policy reasons by the U.S. Trade Representative within that 60-day period.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) today determined that revoking the existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on polyester textured yarn from China and India would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determinations, the existing orders on imports of these products from China and India will remain in place. 

Chair Amy A. Karpel and Commissioners David S. Johanson and Jason E. Kearns voted in the affirmative. 

Today’s action comes under the five-year (sunset) review process required by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. See the attached page for background on these five-year (sunset) reviews.

The Commission’s public report Polyester Textured Yarn from China and India (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-612-613 and 731-TA-1429-1430 (Review), USITC Publication 5640, June 2025) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the reviews.

The report will be available by July 18,2025; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website.

---

BACKGROUND

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act requires the Department of Commerce to revoke an antidumping or countervailing duty order, or terminate a suspension agreement, after five years unless the Department of Commerce and the USITC determine that revoking the order or terminating the suspension agreement would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies (Commerce) and of material injury (USITC) within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

The Commission’s institution notice in five-year reviews requests that interested parties file responses with the Commission concerning the likely effects of revoking the order under review as well as other information. Generally, within 95 days from institution, the Commission will determine whether the responses it has received reflect an adequate or inadequate level of interest in a full review. If responses to the USITC’s notice of institution are adequate, or if other circumstances warrant a full review, the Commission conducts a full review, which includes a public hearing and issuance of questionnaires.

The Commission generally does not hold a hearing or conduct further investigative activities in expedited reviews. Commissioners base their injury determination in expedited reviews on the facts available, including the Commission’s prior injury and review determinations, responses received to its notice of institution, data collected by staff in connection with the reviews, and information provided by the Department of Commerce.

The five-year (sunset) reviews concerning Polyester Textured Yarn from China and India were instituted on December 2, 2024.

On March 7, 2025, the Commission determined to conduct expedited five-year reviews. Chair Amy A. Karpel and Commissioners David S. Johanson and Jason E. Kearns concluded that the domestic interested party group response was adequate, and the respondent interested party group responses were inadequate and voted for expedited reviews. 

A record of the Commission’s vote to conduct expedited reviews is available on the investigations page for Polyester Textured Yarn from China and India; Inv. No. 701-TA-612-613 and 731-TA-1429-1430. 

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) today determined that revoking the existing antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on steel propane cylinders from China and the existing antidumping order on steel propane cylinders from Thailand would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determinations, the existing orders on imports of these products from China and Thailand will remain in place. 

Chair Amy A. Karpel and Commissioners David S. Johanson and Jason E. Kearns voted in the affirmative. 

Today’s action comes under the five-year (sunset) review process required by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. See the attached page for background on these five-year (sunset) reviews.

The Commission’s public report on Steel Propane Cylinders from China and Thailand (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-607 and 731-TA-1417 and 1419 (Review), USITC Publication 5638, June 2025) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the reviews.

The report will be available by July 24, 2025; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website. 

---

BACKGROUND

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act requires the Department of Commerce to revoke an antidumping or countervailing duty order, or terminate a suspension agreement, after five years unless the Department of Commerce and the USITC determine that revoking the order or terminating the suspension agreement would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies (Commerce) and of material injury (USITC) within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

The Commission’s institution notice in five-year reviews requests that interested parties file responses with the Commission concerning the likely effects of revoking the order under review as well as other information. Generally within 95 days from institution, the Commission will determine whether the responses it has received reflect an adequate or inadequate level of interest in a full review. If responses to the USITC’s notice of institution are adequate, or if other circumstances warrant a full review, the Commission conducts a full review, which includes a public hearing and issuance of questionnaires.

The Commission generally does not hold a hearing or conduct further investigative activities in expedited reviews.  Commissioners base their injury determination in expedited reviews on the facts available, including the Commission’s prior injury and review determinations, responses received to its notice of institution, data collected by staff in connection with the reviews, and information provided by the Department of Commerce.

The five-year (sunset) reviews concerning Steel Propane Cylinders from China and Thailand were instituted on July 1, 2024.

On October 4, 2024, the Commission determined to conduct full five-year reviews. Regarding Thailand, Chair Amy A. Karpel and Commissioners David S. Johanson, Rhonda K. Schmidtlein, and Jason E. Kearns concluded that the domestic interested party group response and the respondent interested party group response were both adequate, and voted for a full review.  Regarding China, Chair Amy A. Karpel and Commissioners David S. Johanson, Rhonda K. Schmidtlein, and Jason E. Kearns concluded that the domestic interested party group response was adequate, and the respondent interested party group response was inadequate. Having determined to conduct a full review with respect to Thailand, however, they also voted to conduct full reviews with respect to China to promote administrative efficiency.   

A record of the Commission’s vote to conduct full reviews is available on the investigations page for  Steel Propane Cylinders from China and Thailand; Inv. No. 701-TA-607 and 731-TA-1417 and 1419 (Review). 

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission or USITC) today determined that there is a reasonable indication that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of silicon metal from Australia, Laos, and Norway that are allegedly sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the governments of Australia, Laos, and Norway.  The Commission also determined that there is a reasonable indication that a U.S. industry is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of silicon metal from Angola that are allegedly sold in the United States at less than fair value and imports of silicon metal from Thailand that are allegedly subsidized by the government of Thailand. 

Subscribe to USITC