Repealing Outdated and Unilateral Tariff Authorities Act
Summary
HB2464, titled the "Repealing Outdated and Unilateral Tariff Authorities Act," would repeal section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Section 338 is a long-dormant tariff authority that has allowed the President to impose additional duties on imports from countries that discriminate against U.S. commerce. By striking that section from federal law, the bill would remove this specific statutory tariff tool from the U.S. trade code.
The bill is narrowly drafted and does not create a new tariff regime or change existing tariff rates directly. Instead, it eliminates an old unilateral authority that could otherwise be invoked in trade disputes. The measure was introduced in the House and referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, which has jurisdiction over tariffs and trade policy.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would amend federal trade law by repealing 19 U.S.C. 1338, removing section 338 from the Tariff Act of 1930. That would reduce presidential discretion to impose retaliatory or discriminatory tariffs under that specific provision and would leave any future tariff actions to other authorities in the trade laws or to Congress. The practical effect would be on federal trade policy, importers, exporters, and countries subject to U.S. tariff measures, rather than on state law or state agencies.
Sentiment
Based on the bill title and referral history, the measure appears to be framed as a modernization and cleanup of outdated trade authority, suggesting support from sponsors who view section 338 as obsolete or inconsistent with current trade policy. No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no evidence of formal debate, amendments, or recorded opposition. The available context indicates a neutral procedural posture at introduction, with the bill awaiting committee consideration.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be whether Congress should preserve or eliminate a rarely used but potentially available tariff authority. Supporters would likely argue that section 338 is outdated, redundant, and inconsistent with modern trade governance, while critics could argue that repealing it removes a useful leverage tool for responding to discriminatory foreign trade practices. Because no hearings or votes are provided, the specific positions of members or stakeholders are not documented in the available record.