Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, Foreign Affairs, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently det…
The Secure Trade Act imposes a new additional 10 percent ad valorem duty on all imports into the United States (in addition to existing duties), gives the President limited authority to reduce that percentage for particular economic sectors, and creates a separate, China-specific tariff regime.
For articles from the People’s Republic of China the bill requires China-specific rates in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, raises many rates substantially (including minimums of 35 percent or 100 percent ad valorem for certain ‘‘specified’’ articles), requires annual inflation adjustments, and authorizes tariff-rate quotas, import prohibitions, and further presidential increases or quotas to reduce reliance on Chinese imports.
The bill also changes valuation rules so merchandise from China must be appraised on a defined “United States value” with importer-submitted statements and CBP verification, expands CFIUS review to include certain greenfield and brownfield investments by ‘‘countries of concern,’’ and establishes new mandatory filing requirements for such transactions.
On content alone, the bill is a major overhaul of trade policy with large economic and regulatory consequences and high controversy focused on a specific foreign country. Historically, sweeping tariff overhauls and large, economy‑wide protectionist measures face strong resistance unless bundled into broader negotiated packages or responding to crisis conditions; this text lacks narrow targeting, appropriations details, or clear bipartisan compromise hooks, making enactment unlikely without substantial revision.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is comparatively detailed in statutory rate changes, phase-in schedules, and statutory references, but less developed on fiscal, enforcement, and explanatory elements.
Scope of measures: liberals see opportunity to rebuild supply chains and address human-rights issues; conservatives see blanket protectionism and economic harm.
Scope of measures: liberals see opportunity to rebuild supply chains and address human-rights issues; conservatives see blanket protectionism and economic harm.
A mainstream liberal would likely view the bill as a strong federal tool to rebuild strategic supply chains, penalize human-rights abuses, and incentivize domestic production, but would be cautious about across-the-board tariffing.
They would welcome measures that treat human-rights-violating production and critical supply chains differently and that expand oversight of foreign investments, but worry about regressive impacts on consumers and workers.
They would be alert to the need for accompanying domestic industrial policy and protections for low-income households and labor standards.
A centrist/ pragmatic observer would see the bill as a serious, wide-ranging attempt to address strategic dependencies on China and to strengthen national-security review of foreign investments, but would be concerned about large economic and legal trade-offs.
They would welcome targeted tools for critical supply chains and CFIUS expansion, but worry that blanket duties, very high minimums, and new valuation rules are blunt instruments that could raise costs, invite retaliation, and create legal risk under WTO rules.
Centrists would likely call for more economic analysis, narrower scope, sunset provisions, and stronger congressional oversight of executive tariff proclamations.
A mainstream conservative would generally oppose broad, across-the-board import duties and expansion of federal regulatory power; they would share concerns about China but prefer narrower, market-oriented or security-targeted tools.
The universal 10% duty, high China-specific minimums (including many 100% rates), valuation redefinition, and large presidential discretion would likely be viewed as economically harmful, inflationary, and an overreach of executive authority.
The expansion of CFIUS review may be acceptable in principle, but overall the bill is more protectionist and administratively expansive than most mainstream conservatives favor.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
On content alone, the bill is a major overhaul of trade policy with large economic and regulatory consequences and high controversy focused on a specific foreign country. Historically, sweeping tariff overhauls and large, economy‑wide protectionist measures face strong resistance unless bundled into broader negotiated packages or responding to crisis conditions; this text lacks narrow targeting, appropriations details, or clear bipartisan compromise hooks, making enactment unlikely without substantial revision.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Scope of measures: liberals see opportunity to rebuild supply chains and address human-rights issues; conservatives see blanket protectioni…
On content alone, the bill is a major overhaul of trade policy with large economic and regulatory consequences and high controversy focused…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is comparatively detailed in statutory rate changes, phase-in schedules, and statutory references, but less developed on fiscal, e…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.