• Top 5 states by tariffs paid due to expiration: California ($287 million), Florida ($98 million), New York ($80 million), Texas ($80 million), Georgia ($61 million)
  
  
• Top 5 states by highest average tariff paid due to expiration: Colorado (12.1%), Maine (11.0%), Wisconsin (9.3%), Montana (9.1%), Utah (9.0%)
  
  
• Top 5 source countries by value of GSP imports: Indonesia ($3.9 billion), Thailand ($3.3 billion), Cambodia ($2.7 billion), Brazil ($2.5 billion), Philippines ($1.9 billion)
  
  
• Top 5 source countries by value of (eventual) tariff savings: Cambodia ($268 million), Indonesia ($218 million), Thailand ($139 million), Philippines ($121 million), Brazil ($94 million)
  
  

Import growth in 2021 was massive. Total U.S. goods imports grew by 21%, while those from GSP countries grew by 35%. Yet “competitive need limitations” (CNLs), which lead to GSP loss for specific products, only grew by 2.6%. As a result, $1.8 billion of the currently eligible imports exceeded the 2021 CNL and another $1.5 billion likely will exceed the 2022 cap based on import levels and trends, putting a huge share of future GSP benefits at risk:

• Top 5 states by share of benefits at risk for exceeding the 2021 CNL: Mississippi (42%), Louisiana (26%), Florida (20%), New York (15%), Virginia (13%)
  
  
• Top 5 states by share of benefits likely at risk from the 2022 CNL: Maine (37%), Colorado (27%), Iowa (27%), Hawaii (19%), Michigan (15%)
  
  

Representatives Stephanie Murphy (D-FL) and Jackie Walorski (R-IN) introduced the bipartisan CNL Update Act (H.R.6171), which would amend the CNLs to grow more in line with historical trends. Not only would the CNL Update Act help preserve GSP for much of that “at risk” trade, it would help restore GSP for some of the $10 billion (!!!) in imports that lost GSP in the past due to product reviews:

• Top 5 states by potential GSP savings increase for products that “should” be restored by H.R.6171: Alaska (84%), South Dakota (72%), Michigan (41%), Maryland (38%), Mississippi (42%)
  
  
• Top 5 states by potential GSP savings increase for products that “may” be restored by H.R.6171: South Dakota (4,565%), Wyoming (218%), Maryland (213%), New York (196%), Minnesota (166%)
  
  

While the CNL Update Act has a chance to “preserve and restore,” there remains considerable down-side risk. The GSP renewal language in the House’s America COMPETES Act not only maintains the current CNL thresholds, but creates a high likelihood of full or partial termination for key GSP supplier countries, particularly Brazil, Cambodia, Myanmar, Philippines, and Thailand. Loss of GSP due to current CNL rules, combined with loss for those countries, would decimate the program:

• States where at least 90% of current GSP benefits are at risk: Wisconsin (-97%), West Virginia (-96%), Montana (-92%), Utah (-91%)
  
  
• States where at least 80% of current GSP benefits are at risk: Colorado (-88%), Connecticut (-86%), Arkansas (-85%), Hawaii (-84%), Wyoming (-83%), Maine (-83%), Alaska (-82%), Kansas (-82%), Mississippi (-82%), Texas (-81%), Indiana (-81%)
  
  
• States where at least 70% of current GSP benefits are at risk: Nebraska (-79%), Georgia (-79%), North Carolina (-79%), Michigan (-79%), Washington (-78%), Rhode Island (-78%), Nevada (-78%), Illinois (-77%), Alabama (-76%), New Mexico (-76%), California (-76%), Minnesota (-75%), Tennessee (-75%), Virginia (-74%), Massachusetts (-74%), Oklahoma (-74%), Kentucky (-73%), South Dakota (-72%), Florida (-72%), Oregon (-71%)
  
  

This last set of stats shows that GSP “renewal” can’t be the only priority. It must be renewed in a way that doesn’t decimate the program in the next 2-3 years. After all, it’s impossible to “promote development through trade” with a program that covers no trade.

In the first four months of expiration, American companies paid at least $308 million in extra taxes as a result of GSP expiration. Companies in 31 states paid at least $1 million in tariffs from January-April 2021 due to GSP expiration. The map below shows estimated tariffs for products claiming GSP paid by state in that period.

April was the most expensive month of GSP expiration yet for 21 states – stretching from Florida to Alaska:

• GSP expiration costs have increased every month in Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, Idaho, Kansas, and Virginia.
• GSP expiration costs were about 4x higher in April than January in both Idaho and Delaware, and nearly 2x higher in Colorado and Alabama.
• The extra $2 million in tariffs paid in April by companies in Indiana is 40% higher than the average in the first three months of the year, while the $370,000 paid by companies in Nevada was 75% over the January to March average.

GSP expiration impacts are getting worse over time.

The data on tariffs paid is a conservative estimate, and the real figure likely is higher. Why? Estimates only capture products that continued to claim GSP despite expiration. Yet imports of many products that traditionally get GSP have not claimed it in 2021. Tariffs paid on those imports still would be eligible for refunds in the event of a retroactive renewal, but importers would need to file manual requests.

GSP expiration is already costing American jobs and raising prices for American companies that need inputs and consumers that purchase finished goods. It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. To help the Coalition for GSP educate policymakers on who is hurt by expiration (and how), companies are strongly encouraged to:

• join the Coalition for GSP
• add their name to the free GSP supporter list
• answer our very short survey on GSP expiration impacts to date

In the first two months of expiration, American companies paid at least $135 million in extra taxes as a result of GSP expiration. The map below shows estimated tariffs for products claiming GSP paid by state.

The products facing the most new tariffs vary greatly by state:

• In New York, gold jewelry faced $2.4 million in new tariffs.
• In Florida, roses faced another $2.2 million in new tariffs due to GSP expiration (on top of $1.8 million in January) in the run-up to Valentine’s Day.
• In Texas, nearly $800,000 in tariffs were paid on plywood.
• In Pennsylvania, nearly $400,000 in tariffs were paid on colored pencils.
• In Ohio, $200,000 in tariffs were paid on wire harnesses used in auto manufacturing.

The data on tariffs paid is a conservative estimate, and the real figure likely is millions of dollars more. Why? Estimates only capture products that continued to claim GSP despite expiration. Yet imports of many products that traditionally get GSP did not claim it in February. Tariffs paid on those imports still would be eligible for refunds in the event of a retroactive renewal, but importers would need to file manual requests.

GSP expiration is already costing American jobs and raising prices for American companies that need inputs and consumers that purchase finished goods. It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. To help the Coalition for GSP educate policymakers on who is hurt by expiration (and how), companies are strongly encouraged to:

• write their lawmakers about GSP renewal with our Contact Congress tool
• join the Coalition for GSP
• add their name to the free GSP supporter list
• answer our very short survey on GSP expiration impacts to date

The products facing the most new tariffs vary greatly by state:

• In Florida, roses faced more than $1.8 million in new tariffs due to GSP expiration in the run-up to Valentine’s Day.
• In New York, gold jewelry faced more than $1 million in new tariffs.
• In Louisiana, over $600,000 in tariffs were paid on steel-making materials (likely by a company around the Port of New Orleans for distribution throughout the country).
• In Massachusetts, over $200,000 in tariffs were paid on leather sports gloves.
• In Pennsylvania over $160,000 were paid for rubber gloves. They were also the top products for tariffs faced in Connecticut, Mississippi, and Minnesota. Notably, while GSP countries face new tariffs, identical products from China continue to receive a Section 301 tariff waiver for public health reasons.

The $70 million in tariffs paid is a conservative estimate, and the real figure likely is millions of dollars more. Why? Estimates only capture products that continued to claim GSP despite expiration. Yet for numerous products GSP claims fell dramatically while imports continued or even grew. For example, more than $11 million of road wheels from Thailand (88%) were imported in January that didn’t claim GSP. Just 0.4% of those same imports didn’t claim GSP in January 2020. Camshafts and gelatin from Brazil, guitars from Indonesia, and bicycles from Cambodia similarly saw large values of unclaimed GSP imports in January 2021 when nearly all such imports claimed GSP in January 2020.

GSP expiration is already costing American jobs and raising prices for American companies that need inputs and consumers that purchase finished goods. It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. To help the Coalition for GSP educate policymakers on who is hurt by expiration (and how), companies are strongly encouraged to:

• write their lawmakers about GSP renewal with our Contact Congress tool
• join the Coalition for GSP
• add their name to the free GSP supporter list
• answer our very short survey on GSP expiration impacts to date

California accounts for more than a quarter of GSP savings, more than the next 3 states – New York, Florida, Texas – combined. Georgia, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Washington, and Pennsylvania round out the top 10 states for GSP savings in 2020.

Estimated GSP savings for Colorado grew from $4 million in 2019 to $14 million in 2020, by far the largest increase. Estimated GSP savings also grew in Wisconsin (+$869,000), Arkansas (+$478,000), Washington (+$300,000), Delaware (+$73,000), and Wyoming (+$34,000). Estimated savings fell in all other states.

While Covid-19 had big impacts on GSP imports in the spring, declines were largely due to country suspensions. Excluding products impacted by country suspensions (e.g., India, Turkey, Thailand), most states’ GSP savings grew. For example, New York’s GSP savings grew by $15 million on non-impacted products but fell by $2.5 million overall due to country suspensions. Similarly, Texas’ savings GSP by $9 million on non-impacted products but fell by over $7 million overall.

Since GSP expired on December 31, American likely have paid about $110 million in tariffs that previously would’ve been “GSP savings.” It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. To help the Coalition for GSP educate policymakers on who is hurt by expiration (and how), companies are strongly encouraged to:

• join the Coalition for GSP
• add their name to the free GSP supporter list
• answer our very short survey on GSP expiration impacts to date

To be clear: they’re not paid by the countries and haven’t achieved any other U.S. policy goals and won’t be refunded if benefits are reinstated. They’re just $500 million in new taxes on U.S. companies at a time of unprecedented economic collapse and job losses.

Above is the breakdown of estimated tariffs paid by state. Imports into California and New Jersey have faced about $50 million in new tariffs each. Companies in traditional – or newfound – election battleground states Texas, Georgia, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio were all in the top 10 of tariffs paid, collectively paying up to $168 million in extra taxes.

And the taxes paid continue to climb.

The bulk of taxes – up to $366 million from June 2019 to August 2020 – have been paid on imports from India. The typical GSP importer from India had 14 employees and saved $100,000 per year. The burden falls overwhelmingly on small businesses struggling to make it through the pandemic, not the large multinational that can rapidly shift sourcing to suppliers in other countries. A report from April 2019 profiled many U.S. companies that would be hurt by termination for India (and others).

Up to $111 million in tariffs have been paid on imports from Turkey from May 2019 to August 2020. In similar comments submitted as part of the Turkey review, we noted the typical GSP importer from Turkey had 14 employees and saved about $150,000 annually. The Turkey review was launched over “market access” issues, but there were no known discussions about resolving issues. Instead, Turkey was “graduated” for sufficient economic development despite just entered a recession and having a GDP per capita that has now fallen in 5 consecutive years (the metric used to determine if countries should be graduated from GSP automatically).

Up to $23 million in tariffs have been paid on imports from Thailand from May 2020 to August 2020. Importers from Thailand tend to be a little bigger – but far from large! – with the typical importer having 28 employees and savings $183,000 annually under GSP. Most unhelpfully, the product facing the most tariffs appear to be face masks. Higher tariffs on face masks may not have seemed like a big deal when Thailand’s partial suspension was announced in October 2019, but we’re in a very different world with mask imports surging due Covid-19.

Potential GSP renewal legislation is highly unlikely to address country-specific issues, but the impacts from terminations are no less real for American companies than the prospects of expiration. If Congress considers changes to the GSP programs in the future, ensuring importers interests are not ignored in the country review processes should be a top priority.

GSP eliminates $25,000 to $30,000 in tariffs annually on panels designed in the United States and manufactured in Thailand. The savings help Vtronix keep costs low for its customers — SME American manufacturers — who in turn are better able to compete against large, multinational producers.

Watch founder Anil Gowda explain how “this year, especially with Covid…renewing GSP would be a great benefit for us.”

If you’re a GSP importer, submit your own video testimonial here.

While California is far-and-away the #1 state for GSP savings, Texas edges it out for most tariffs paid this year due to country suspensions – companies in each state have paid up to $18.6 million in extra taxes. Companies in New Jersey are not far behind, having paid up to $18.2 million in extra taxes due to country suspensions.

The costs are driven by different Trump administration actions. Texas is the top state in tariffs paid due to India’s suspension, New Jersey has paid the most due to Turkey’s suspension, and California has paid the most due to Thailand’s partial suspension. The table at the very bottom shows tariffs paid, by country suspension and total, for all states.

Including the tariffs paid due to suspensions, both in 2019 and 2020, drastically changes the state savings trends. Instead of the sea of dark red states with declines of over 20% shown yesterday (and below, right), only a 5 states are likely to have seen such declines without country suspensions. Similarly, there would be savings growth for states in every region of the country instead of limited to the Mountain West.

Swings states, including big states not traditionally in play in Presidential or Senate elections, account for some of the biggest dollar swings. Without country suspensions:

• Texas companies’ savings would’ve increased up to $2.4 million instead of declining by $12.7 million, a $15+ million swing
• Georgia companies’ savings would’ve increased up to $3.1 million instead of declining by $5.8 million, nearly a $9 million swing

In more traditional swings states, maintaining full GSP eligibility for all countries would have mitigated declines likely associated with the Covid-19 pandemic. For example:

• Florida companies’ savings would’ve declined by $4.3 million instead of $12.6 million, an $8+ million swing
• Pennsylvania companies’ savings would’ve declined by $350,000 instead of $8.2 million, nearly an $8 million swing
• Michigan companies’ savings would’ve declined by $3.2 million instead of $8.2 million, an $5+ million swing

Swings were even bigger on a percentage basis in states where GSP savings are traditionally lower:

• Instead of declining by 47%, New Mexico companies’ savings would’ve increased by up to 161%, a 200+ percentage point swing
• Instead of declining by 60%, Minnesota companies’ savings would’ve increased by up to 17%, nearly an 80 percentage point swing

These are real costs to real American companies and workers – many in places that will be hotly contested in the 2020 elections – on top of the challenges related to the Covid-19 pandemic and economic fallout. In addition to congressional reauthorization of GSP, administration decisions to restore lost GSP eligibility would provide significant benefits to struggling American companies.

The top states by GSP savings have been fairly consistent over the years. California accounts for more than a quarter of GSP savings – about as much as the next 4 states (Florida, New York, Texas, New Jersey) combined. Washington and Tennessee have moved into the top 10 states in 2020, replacing Pennsylvania and North Carolina.

Savings are down sharply, from $555 million in 2019 to $407 million in 2020. The map below shows the widespread declines, with the Mountain West being a notable exception. Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, and Arizona form a string of growth states from the Canadian to Mexican borders. Colorado’s savings increased over 150% from 2019, largely driven by a jump in backpack imports. Massachusetts is the only other state where GSP savings are up in the first half of 2020.

Savings declined by over 40% in more than 20 states, including a whopping 78% in Vermont. GSP savings also declined by 67% in Montana and Oklahoma, 63% in North Dakota, 61% in Michigan, 60% in Minnesota, and 52% in West Virginia.

Declines are NOT due to Covid-19. American companies have paid up to $183 million in extra tariffs in 2020 due to GSP suspensions for India, Turkey, and Thailand. In the first half of 2019, tariffs paid due to suspensions (India and Turkey only) were about $35 million. Add those potential savings to actual savings in both years, and the first half totals were nearly identical ($590 million) in spite of Covid-19-related declines. Our next post will dig into state-by-state costs in 2020 associated with the suspensions.

Lost GSP for India and Turkey cost American companies as much as $33 million in extra tariffs in July, including up to $26.5 million in new taxes on imports from India and $6.5 million on imports from Turkey. The impacts of the decisions are clear, as shown in the graph below. Before June 2019, year-over-year GSP rose in 37 straight months.

GSP savings from other countries continued to grow, increasing $18.4 million (30%) from September 2018 to September 2019. Savings on imports from Cambodia grew by $10.9 million, from Indonesia by $4.1 million, from Burma by $2.1 million, and from the Philippines by $1.6 million.

By value, the states with the largest year-over-year savings declines were Florida (-$2.1 million), New Jersey (-$2.1 million), Texas (-$2.1 million), Pennsylvania (-$1.1 million), New York (-$984,000), Michigan (-$955,000), North Carolina (-$878,000), Louisiana (-$605,000), Iowa (-$545,000), and Massachusetts (-$490,000).

Savings for companies in Delaware declined over 90%, driven by lost GSP for India. Savings for companies in Maine declined by 84%, resulting from broader-based declines in imports from Brazil, India, Thailand, etc.

Fifteen states saw GSP savings increase in September. Among those, California (+$3.4 million) accounted for 60% of GSP savings increases.