• 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.

From January-September 2021, American companies paid at least $763 million in extra taxes as a result of GSP expiration. Imports into 38 states (plus Puerto Rico) paid at least $1 million in tariffs due to GSP expiration. The map below shows estimated tariffs paid for products claiming GSP by state.

It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. We strongly encourage GSP importers hurt by expiration to answer our new survey here. As always, no company-specific details will be published without permission.

From January-August 2021, American companies paid at least $666 million in extra taxes as a result of GSP expiration. Imports into 36 states (plus Puerto Rico) paid at least $1 million in tariffs from January-July 2021 due to GSP expiration. The map below shows estimated tariffs paid for products claiming GSP by state.

August was the most expensive month of GSP expiration yet both nationally and for 15 states: Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington. Tariffs paid on imports into Minnesota were 84% higher than any previous month. For Pennsylvania and Georgia, tariffs paid were 53% and 27% higher than any previous month, respectively.

GSP expiration costs have a direct, negative impact on American workers:

• “GSP can be the difference between making a profit or a loss and without profits we obviously can’t increase wages and benefits” says Charlie Smith of BROSCO, a 4th generation, family-owned millwork distributor in Massachusetts and Maine. “Continued losses put all of our 360 workers’ jobs and livelihoods at risk.”
  
• “We are having challenges staying competitive“ says Ajay Kochhar of A&S Distributors in Salida, California. The 7-worker company has paid over $60,000 in extra taxes on food products from Fiji because of GSP expiration. “We can’t hire and give employees full benefits as this is a major increase.”
  
• “The tariffs when added to the rapidly escalating costs of containers have been devastating” says Sandra Colyer of Lily Koo LLC in Jamestown, North Carolina. “Employees laid off due to Covid are slowly being brought back, but return to work would occur more quickly if money was not being spent on tariffs.”

It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. We strongly encourage GSP importers hurt by expiration to answer our new survey here. As always, no company-specific details will be published without permission.

From January-July 2021, American companies paid at least $565 million in extra taxes as a result of GSP expiration. Imports into 36 states (plus Puerto Rico) paid at least $1 million in tariffs from January-July 2021 due to GSP expiration. The map below shows estimated tariffs paid for products claiming GSP by state.

July was the most expensive month of GSP expiration yet for 12 states: Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. In Rhode Island, tariffs costs in July were more than the previously three months combined. Tantalum metals used primarily to manufacture electronic components from Kazakhstan and Christmas lights from Cambodia – the two products driving the Rhode Island increase – show the diverse impacts of GSP expiration.

GSP expiration costs have a direct, negative impact on American workers:

• “GSP can be the difference between making a profit or a loss and without profits we obviously can’t increase wages and benefits” says Charlie Smith of BROSCO, a 4th generation, family-owned millwork distributor in Massachusetts and Maine. “Continued losses put all of our 360 workers’ jobs and livelihoods at risk.”
  
• “We are having challenges staying competitive“ says Ajay Kochhar of A&S Distributors in Salida, California. The 7-worker company has paid over $60,000 in extra taxes on food products from Fiji because of GSP expiration. “We can’t hire and give employees full benefits as this is a major increase.”
  
• “The tariffs when added to the rapidly escalating costs of containers have been devastating” says Sandra Colyer of Lily Koo LLC in Jamestown, North Carolina. “Employees laid off due to Covid are slowly being brought back, but return to work would occur more quickly if money was not being spent on tariffs.”

It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. We strongly encourage GSP importers hurt by expiration to answer our new survey here. As always, no company-specific details will be published without permission.

In the first five months of expiration, American companies paid at least $397 million in extra taxes as a result of GSP expiration. Companies in 32 states paid at least $1 million in tariffs from January-May 2021 due to GSP expiration. The map below shows estimated tariffs for products claiming GSP paid by state in that period.

May was the most expensive month of GSP expiration yet both nationally and for 19 states: Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Virginia. In three states – Colorado, Kansas, and New Mexico – tariffs paid in May were at least double any of the previous four months.

While many believe the United States has low tariffs, Colorado companies have paid extra tariffs averaging 11.7% due to GSP expiration. Companies in Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, Utah, and Wisconsin have all paid extra tariffs average 7-10%.

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.

It is critical that Congress renew GSP – with refunds for tariffs paid – as soon as possible. Companies that want to help the Coalition for GSP educate policymakers on who is hurt by expiration (and how) should:

• 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.

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 impacts of the India and Turkey decisions are clear, as shown in the graph below. Year-over-year GSP savings regularly were growing by $10+ million per month. In fact, June marked the first time since April 2016 (37 months) that year-over-year GSP savings declined. The $15 million year-over-year drop was the largest decline in GSP savings since the 2008-2009 financial crisis.

GSP savings from other countries continued to grow, increasing $12.5 million (23%) from June 2018 to June 2019. Savings on imports from Cambodia grew by $7.3 million, from Indonesia by $3.0 million, from Thailand by $1.6 million, and from Burma by $1.3 million.

But growth from other countries was not able to offset the loss of GSP ineligibility for India and Turkey throughout the country: 39 states plus DC and Puerto saw GSP savings decline from June 2018 to June 2018.

By value, the states with the largest year-over-year savings declines were New Jersey (-$4.1 million), Florida (-$3.6 million), Texas (-$2.0 million), New York (-$1.2 million), Illinois (-$1.1 million), Louisiana (-$1.0 million), Michigan (-$942,000), North Carolina (-$882,000), Georgia (-$716,000), and South Carolina (-$512,000).

By percent, the states with the largest year-over-year savings declines were Louisiana (-88%), Nebraska (-82%), Vermont (-76%), Wyoming (-71%), Minnesota (-71%), Mississippi (-68%), New Mexico (-65%), Iowa (-62%), Arkansas (-60%), and Idaho (-54%).

In many of these states, declines were wholly attributable to lost GSP for India and Turkey, leaving little chance that savings will bounce back in July.

Kicking India and Turkey out would cost American companies over $300 million annually in new tariffs paid. But in the case of India, it also could lead to (technically unrelated) new tariffs on US exports.

India repeatedly has delayed implementing retaliatory tariffs on US exports in response to US Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, despite notifying the WTO of its intent to do so last May. Top US exports on the list include apples, almonds, and chemicals. It has been understood that delays were tied to ongoing US-India talks over GSP and other trade irritants. Tariffs currently are scheduled to take effect on May 2

Indian press has reported that tariffs likely will be delayed again – at least for a little while. “India may not wait till May 15 for imposing the retaliatory duties but may come up with a separate notification for immediate implementation” if GSP benefits are terminated in the interim.

Based on 2018 trade data, the tit-for-tat escalation could lead to nearly $500 million in new tariffs on two-way, US-India trade. The table below shows the state-by-state breakdown.

Some states clearly would be hurt more by tariffs on imports: Georgia, New Jersey, Florida, Virginia, Texas. Others clearly could be hurt more by new tariffs on their exports: California, Washington, North Carolina, Alabama.

Of course, all the tariffs likely could be avoided if the President does not issue a proclamation terminating GSP benefits for India, as has been requested by over 430 US companies and associations, 25 associations; and Senators John Cornyn and Mark Warner.

Sometimes the best course of action is no action at all.