Miller Participates in Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee Hearing on American Trade Enforcement Priorities
February 25, 2025
Washington, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Carol Miller (R-WV) participated in a Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee hearing on American trade enforcement priorities and how the Trump administration can ensure a level playing field for United States businesses and farmers.
Image
Congresswoman Miller began by expressing her gratitude for President Trump’s commitment to protecting American businesses and then relayed her concerns regarding China’s influence in the harming of American manufacturing.
“Over the last four years, we watched the Biden administration sit idly by as foreign nations launched a full-scale attack on American companies. I am thankful that those days are over and we now have a President who will advocate for American businesses, engage with our allies, and spur domestic manufacturing. Last Congress, I introduced the Protecting American Advanced Manufacturing Act to eliminate the access to American tax dollars Chinese-linked manufacturers currently enjoy in the 45X manufacturing tax credit. 45X is the very credit meant to level the playing field for domestic manufacturers and yet the Chinese companies continue to take American tax dollars. We urgently need to address this. But another concern more directly related to this hearing is the very same Chinese-linked manufacturers circumventing tariffs and putting U.S. manufacturers at risk. For example, Chinese companies send solar components through Southeast Asian countries to avoid Anti-Dumping and Countervailing duty orders. The manufacturing district in Ravenswood, West Virginia provides thousands of good-paying jobs to my constituents and bolsters our national security through production of aluminum, titanium, and steel. I am concerned that the plants in my district and around the country are being harmed as bad actors enter the U.S. by circumventing their products through other countries. Circumvention decreases the revenue we collect through tariffs and puts American jobs at risk as our market is flooded with unfairly subsidized and priced products,” said Congresswoman Miller.
Congresswoman Miller asked Ambassador Jeffrey Gerrish of Schagrin Associates to share his thoughts on what the United States could do to stop China from avoiding tariffs.
“How can the U.S. strengthen cooperation with allies and trading partners to prevent bad actors from using third countries to evade duties, while ensuring compliance with international trade commitments?” asked Congresswoman Miller.
“There are several actions we can take to get better cooperation from our trading partners. One is to establish customs corporation agreements with our counterparts in Customs and Border Patrol in other countries to get them to crack down on transshipment and other efforts to evade duties. We can have our customs authorities work with their customs authorities to get better cooperation to crack down on these efforts. We made efforts to do that in the first Trump administration with Vietnam, and they [continue to be a problem. We can also potentially [investigate] under section 301 to investigate the lack of action being taken by customs authorities to see if they are not only turning a blind eye but even facilitating transshipment and circumvention that occur. This should be another tool to try and address this problem,” responded Ambassador Gerrish.
Congresswoman Miller also highlighted how South Korea is neglecting to respect digital trade agreements between their country and the United States. She asked Jonathan McHale, Vice President of Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) how South Korea’s trade policies impact the United States and how the Trump administration should resolve these trade issues.
“I would now like to shift to digital trade. Trade partnerships are a two-way street, and I have serious concerns that some of our partners aren’t holding up their end of the bargain. Last Congress, I introduced the U.S. - Republic of Korea Digital Trade Enforcement Act that protects American digital companies if Korea passes a law that harms digital businesses. It is my understanding that the Republic of Korea is still pursuing this legislation, albeit under the guise of a so-called ‘ex-post’ framework that covertly still targets specific U.S. companies. Mr. McHale, do you believe both the Online Platform Monopoly Regulation Act and the Korean Fair Trade Commission’s ex-post approach amount to discrimination against US companies? Do you believe the Trump administration should seek trade and other enforcement remedies to ensure this type of Korean discrimination against U.S. companies no longer occurs?” asked Congresswoman Miller.
“Yes, if you look at the service definitions and the thresholds that the Korea fair trade commission’s proposal institutes, they are both aimed at targeting U.S. firms even though some Korean Companies may be swept in. The key question is does it put U.S. firms at a competitive disadvantage when competing in the markets? What we’ve seen is Chinese companies are rapidly coming into the market. Their revenues are up to $2 billion dollars a year and they would not fall within these definitions. U.S. companies are now competing against Chinese and Korean companies in the market based on specific definitions that subject [U.S. companies] through this proposed law to fines, prohibited conduct, and injunctive actions but not their competitors. To me, that looks like discrimination,” responded Mr. McHale.
Congresswoman Miller asked Ambassador Jeffrey Gerrish of Schagrin Associates to share his thoughts on what the United States could do to stop China from avoiding tariffs.
“How can the U.S. strengthen cooperation with allies and trading partners to prevent bad actors from using third countries to evade duties, while ensuring compliance with international trade commitments?” asked Congresswoman Miller.
“There are several actions we can take to get better cooperation from our trading partners. One is to establish customs corporation agreements with our counterparts in Customs and Border Patrol in other countries to get them to crack down on transshipment and other efforts to evade duties. We can have our customs authorities work with their customs authorities to get better cooperation to crack down on these efforts. We made efforts to do that in the first Trump administration with Vietnam, and they [continue to be a problem. We can also potentially [investigate] under section 301 to investigate the lack of action being taken by customs authorities to see if they are not only turning a blind eye but even facilitating transshipment and circumvention that occur. This should be another tool to try and address this problem,” responded Ambassador Gerrish.
Congresswoman Miller also highlighted how South Korea is neglecting to respect digital trade agreements between their country and the United States. She asked Jonathan McHale, Vice President of Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) how South Korea’s trade policies impact the United States and how the Trump administration should resolve these trade issues.
“I would now like to shift to digital trade. Trade partnerships are a two-way street, and I have serious concerns that some of our partners aren’t holding up their end of the bargain. Last Congress, I introduced the U.S. - Republic of Korea Digital Trade Enforcement Act that protects American digital companies if Korea passes a law that harms digital businesses. It is my understanding that the Republic of Korea is still pursuing this legislation, albeit under the guise of a so-called ‘ex-post’ framework that covertly still targets specific U.S. companies. Mr. McHale, do you believe both the Online Platform Monopoly Regulation Act and the Korean Fair Trade Commission’s ex-post approach amount to discrimination against US companies? Do you believe the Trump administration should seek trade and other enforcement remedies to ensure this type of Korean discrimination against U.S. companies no longer occurs?” asked Congresswoman Miller.
“Yes, if you look at the service definitions and the thresholds that the Korea fair trade commission’s proposal institutes, they are both aimed at targeting U.S. firms even though some Korean Companies may be swept in. The key question is does it put U.S. firms at a competitive disadvantage when competing in the markets? What we’ve seen is Chinese companies are rapidly coming into the market. Their revenues are up to $2 billion dollars a year and they would not fall within these definitions. U.S. companies are now competing against Chinese and Korean companies in the market based on specific definitions that subject [U.S. companies] through this proposed law to fines, prohibited conduct, and injunctive actions but not their competitors. To me, that looks like discrimination,” responded Mr. McHale.
###