Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JustAnotherGen

(38,109 posts)
4. That's incorrect
Sun Aug 31, 2025, 09:13 AM
Aug 2025

The 301 (China) Tariff Lists (there were four tranches) allowed for multiple exclusions over the years.

Prior company as Trade Compliance Officer (Hyper scale data manufacturer) September 24, 2018 to.September 24, 2019 annual tariff for parts and components (motherboards, chips, cables, cpus, gpus, etc etc) went from about $2M.to $98M annually.

Exclusions on List 3 & 4 enabled me to claw back $28M for that year alone.

My substitution drawback 1st claim was $30M.

I've been doing this a long time. I'm a Licensed CB, CES, Classification master, etc etc. I'm head hunted weekly and sought after for insight and perspective on managing Global Trade.

BTW - the 301's and 232's were continued under Katherine Tsai's leadership as US Trade Rep.

Some people at DU are passionate about Gaza, Environment, etc etc.

This isn't passionate opinion for me. Its how I make my living. I live in CFR 15 and 19 and the HTSUS.



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Just waiting JustAnotherGen Aug 2025 #1
And that's exactly what the Trump administration will argue why the lower court ruling should be overturned Fiendish Thingy Aug 2025 #2
That's incorrect JustAnotherGen Aug 2025 #4
I think you Misunderstood me Fiendish Thingy Aug 2025 #5
Ahh - i see JustAnotherGen Aug 2025 #6
I agree on all points. Nt Fiendish Thingy Aug 2025 #7
I've only skimmed the decision - but two Obama-appointed judges dissented. Ms. Toad Aug 2025 #3
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Judge finds tariff policy...»Reply #4