Over 3000 companies have dragged the United State Government before the court for increasing import duties paid on goods from China and imposing fresh tariff on other sectors that were not captured by the country’s law.
The companies, including Tesla Inc, Ford Motor Co Target Corp , Walgreen Co and Home Depot, argued that the President Donald Trump led administration failed to impose tariffs within a required 12-month period and did not comply with administrative procedures.
Other companies involve in the legal battle include heavy truck manufacturer Volvo Group North America U.S. auto parts retailer Pep Boys, clothing company Ralph Lauren, Sysco Corp, guitar manufacturer Gibson Brands, Lenovo’s U.S. unit, Dole Packaged Foods, a unit of Itochu Corp and golf equipment manufacturer Callaway Golf Co.
In the suits filed before U.S. Court of International Trade, the petitioners named U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and the Customs and Border Protection agency, and challenge what they described an unlawful escalation of the U.S. trade war with China through the imposition of a third and fourth round of tariffs.
The companies challenge the administration’s decision not to resolve the trade war between it and China, just as they claimed that the government decision was impacting on the price of goods imported from the Asian country
According to the suit, the petitioners challenged tariffs in two separate groups known as List 3 and List 4A, while list 3 includes 25 percent tariffs on about $200 billion in imports, list 4A included 7.5 percent tariffs on $120 billion in goods.
They said: “One suit argues the administration cannot expand tariffs to other Chinese imported goods for reasons untethered to the unfair intellectual property policies and practices it originally investigated”.
On Sept. 15, the World Trade Organization (WTO) had found the United States breached global trading rules by imposing multibillion-dollar tariffs in Trump’s trade war with China.
The Trump administration says tariffs on Chinese goods were justified because China was stealing intellectual property and forcing U.S. companies to transfer technology for access to China’s markets.