“We had a slight increase in bike sales prices but not enough to cover the outrageous tariff rates,” reported Woombikes’ Jesse Rendon. “Given the current economic crises we are in, having to pay additional fees for tariffs is like putting salt on a wound.”

Founded in 2014, Woombikes already has grown to 60 employees. It was named to the Inc. 5000 fastest-growing private companies in 2019, 2020, and 2021. Yet millions of dollars in new tariffs hurt, and not just Woombikes. Coalition for GSP data shows over $24 million in tariffs paid on bicycles due to GSP expiration from January 2021-April 2022. Expiration costs are accelerating: year-to-date tariffs on bicycles (generally) are 163% higher in 2022 than 2021, and tariffs on children’s bikes specifically are 201% higher.

Congress can help by passing retroactive GSP renewal legislation ASAP. According to Rendon, “Having the $1.9M refunded will allow me to pay down my debt, as well as hire new employees to scale the company to support our current growth. We also will be able to offer more benefits like company matching for our new 401(k) plan and possibly bonuses for our employees.”

If you’re a GSP importer, please help by answering the survey/sharing your story here. No company-specific information is shared without permission (which Woombikes granted). Even if responses cannot be shared publicly, they help inform the Coalition for GSP’s conversations with policymakers about the importance of renewing GSP.

• 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.

The “temporary” GSP lapse could lead to permanent closure for Bueno of California, which already has paid over $800,000 in extra tariffs due to GSP expiration. That is a massive amount for the 20-person company in Fullerton, California, which sells handbags, wallets, and soft carry-all luggage both online and through major retailers in the United States and Canada. For Bueno, new costs have meant declining orders, layoffs, and canceled investments – and possibly worse in the near future.

I might close the company once our lease expires. The US government is not friendly to small business owners.

Bueno of California President Joseph Pagliaro

The feeling that tariffs are unavoidable is particularly strong in (though not limited to) the travel goods industry. Section 301 remedies imposed on China starting in 2018 now raise tariffs on travel goods by up to 45%. Like many others, Bueno found new suppliers in India and Cambodia to avoid these “outrageous” tariffs. Then India’s GSP was terminated in 2019, raising tariffs on those products. Then Congress allowed the entire GSP program to lapse at the end of 2020, raising tariffs on Cambodian too. Not to mention a global pandemic that has reduced demand for travel-related products such as luggage. There are no good options, and Bueno is now buying more from China despite the 45% tariffs.

Reduced orders hurt GSP’s development goals in Cambodia, whose GDP per capita of $1,513 in 2020 was about 42 times smaller than the United States. After years of growth, Cambodia’s GDP per capita declined 8% in 2020, more than three times the 2.6% decline in the United States. Bueno’s contract factories, which employ mostly women, must pass U.S. safety and social compliance audits done by independent audit company. These are “good jobs” at risk for vulnerable populations that desperately need them.

While Congress can renew GSP “retroactively,” decisions such as “close the business instead of renew the lease” are not so easy to undo. Congress must renew GSP before it is too late for all the companies in Bueno of California’s situation.

Note: this example came from a new Coalition survey on expiration impacts. It was published with permission. GSP importers are encouraged to take the survey here – no company-specific details will be published without such permission.

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

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.

Lost GSP for India cost American companies an estimated $30.4 million in July, while lost GSP for Turkey cost them another $6.4 million. The impacts of the decisions are clear, as shown in the graph below. Before June, year-over-year GSP rose in 37 straight months.

GSP savings from other countries continued to grow, increasing $11.1 million (18%) from July 2018 to July 2019. Savings on imports from Cambodia grew by $8.1 million, from the Philippines by $2.7 million, and from Indonesia by $1.7 million

But growth from other countries was not able to offset the loss of GSP ineligibility for India and Turkey throughout the country: 41 states plus DC and Puerto Rico saw GSP savings decline from July 2018 to July 2019.

By value, the states with the largest year-over-year savings declines were New Jersey (-$3.4 million), New York (-$3.3 million), Florida (-$2.5 million), Texas (-$2.1 million), Michigan (-$1.3 million), South Carolina (-$1.1 million), Maryland (-$1.0 million), Kentucky (-$976,000), North Carolina (-$858,000), and Pennsylvania (-$852,000).

By percent, the states with the largest year-over-year savings declines were New Mexico (-87%), Louisiana (-78%), Vermont (-75%), Iowa (-72%), and West Virginia (-54%).

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.

Shifting trade from China to countries like India does not appear to be a byproduct of recent actions, but instead one of President Trump’s explicit goals:

And it’s working: GSP saved American companies $105 million in March, an increase of $28 million (36%) from March 2018 and the second highest level on record. In the first quarter of 2019, GSP saved American companies $285 million. That is $63 million more than the first quarter of 2018 – itself a record-shattering year.

Products hit by Section 301 tariffs when imported from China account for 90% of increased GSP imports in 2019. Overall, GSP imports rose by about $760 million, with $672 million coming on products on China Section 301 lists. GSP imports of products on those Section 301 lists increased 19%, while GSP imports of other products increased by just 5%.

As shown last week, imports from China subject to new tariffs are down significantly. The chart below shows countries from which GSP imports of products on China Section 301 lists have increased the most in the first quarter of 2019.

For India, 97% of increased 2019 GSP imports are on the China Section 301 lists. GSP imports on Section 301 lists increased by $193 million (18%), while imports of everything else increased by just $7 million (2%).

Similarly for Turkey, 97% of increased 2019 GSP imports are on the China Section 301 lists. GSP imports on Section 301 lists increased by $40 million (13%), while imports of everything else increased by just $1.2 million (less than 1%).

For the Philippines, GSP imports of products on China 301 lists growth helped offset declining GSP imports of all other products. South Africa, Brazil, and Egypt saw similar increases in Section 301-affected products offset losses of other products.

GSP imports from Indonesia grew *only* twice as much on affected products. Yet even here growth rates are faster for products on the Section 301 lists: GSP imports of products affected by new China tariffs grew by 22%, while imports of other products grew by 15%.

Not only would terminating GSP for India, Turkey, or others under review (Thailand, Indonesia) hurt many American companies and workers that have relied on GSP for years. It also would reduce viable sourcing options for companies looking to buy less from China in response to Section 301 tariffs – thereby undermining the President’s own objectives.

In the first two months of 2018, companies paid $145 million. That includes only products that claimed GSP despite the expiration. Companies have until September 19 to claim refunds manually, so actual refunds paid for January-February likely will be higher than $145 million.

GSP imports were up by 8 percent compared to February 2017. Had companies not been forced to pay them, tariff savings would have increased by 17 percent. Arizona and Utah were among the states with the biggest increases in tariffs paid because of expiration, as shown in the graphic below.

GSP expiration cost Arizona companies $422,000 in February. Potential savings were up $238,000 (130 percent) compared to one year earlier. Chemicals from India, fashion accessories and conveyor belts from Thailand, and tires from Indonesia contributed most to the increases.

GSP expiration cost Utah companies $313,000 in February. Potential savings were up $120,000 (62 percent) compared to one year earlier. Bicycles from Cambodia and travel goods and compressor pumps from the Philippines contributed most to the increases.

In addition to Arizona and Utah, companies in 20 other statessaw potential GSP savings increase by at least 20 percent, including: Alaska, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming.

Potential savings on GSP imports from Ukraine increased by 195 percent compared to February of last year. Chocolate products into Pennsylvania accounted for nearly a third of imports from Ukraine. Companies paid about $1.1 million in tariffs on plywood, led by importers in Florida.

*** REMINDER: GSP GOES BACK INTO EFFECT APRIL 22 BUT PRODUCT- AND COUNTRY-SPECIFIC BENEFITS MAY BE AT RISK AS PART OF ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PROCESS.***

While GSP has been renewed through 2020, we encourage GSP program users to sign up for the free GSP Supporter List to receive periodic updates on such issues such as refunds and the Annual Review process.

By comparison, the most tariffs paid in a single month during the last 2-year expiration was “just” $61 million. So the stakes for a swift, retroactive renewal are much, much higher for American companies this time around.

GSP imports were up by 18 percent compared to January 2017. Had companies not been forced to pay them, tariff savings would have increased by 21 percent. Montana and South Carolina were among the states with big increases in GSP imports getting slapped with new tariffs, as shown in the graphic below.

GSP expiration cost Montana companies $46,000 in January. Potential savings were up $38,000 (514 percent) compared to one year earlier. Travel goods from Philippines and fishing lures from Cambodia contributed most to the increases. As noted recently, Montana Fly Company in Colombia Falls had to lay off 3 workers due to higher tariffs associated with GSP expiration.

GSP expiration cost South Carolina companies $1.8 million in January. Potential savings were up $607,000 (49 percent) compared to one year earlier. Plastic resins from South Africa, motorcycles from Thailand, and plaited goods (baskets, wickerwork) from India contributed most to the increases.

In addition to Georgia and North Carolina, companies in 19 other states (plus DC and Puerto Rico) saw potential GSP savings increase by at least 20 percent, including: Alaska, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and Wyoming.

Potential savings on GSP imports from Tunisia increased by 115 percent compared to January of last year. Maryland companies alone imported $3.4 million in olive oil claiming GSP in January. GSP would’ve eliminated about $1.2 million in import taxes on monumental and building stone in January had it been in place. Illinois was among the largest importing states.

*** REMINDER: GSP EXPIRED EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1.***

The House passed GSP renewal legislation in February, but the Senate must pass legislation for GSP benefits to resume. Please use our Contact Congress tool to write your Senators about GSP renewal; answer our brief survey on how GSP expiration impacts you, and/or sign up for the free GSP supporter list to show the broad support for renewal.