HB4978, titled the Secure Trade Act, would impose a broad new 10 percent ad valorem duty on imports of goods into the United States, in addition to any existing tariff or duty. The bill also gives the President limited authority to reduce that across-the-board duty for particular economic sectors if doing so is in the national interest or national security interest, after consulting with the tax-writing committees in Congress.
A major focus of the bill is trade with the People’s Republic of China. It directs the President to revise the tariff schedule to create China-specific duty rates, sets a minimum 35 percent duty for most Chinese imports, and raises duties on certain designated strategic or sensitive goods to at least 100 percent. It also phases in these increases over several years, authorizes tariff-rate quotas and possible import prohibitions for certain Chinese goods, and requires inflation adjustments for some duties. The bill further changes customs valuation rules for merchandise imported from China by requiring appraisal based on a U.S. value standard and importer submissions subject to Customs and Border Protection verification.
The bill would also expand the list of covered goods and policy tools tied to supply-chain security. It identifies “specified articles” by reference to critical supply chains, Section 301 and Section 232 investigations, and certain dual-use items, and it gives the President additional authority to modify tariffs, impose quotas, or prohibit imports to reduce dependence on Chinese supply chains or address unfair trade practices and human rights concerns. In addition, it amends the Defense Production Act to bring certain greenfield and brownfield investments by foreign countries of concern under CFIUS review and mandatory declaration requirements, especially where such investments involve real estate and the establishment of U.S. businesses.
Because the bill was only referred to committee and no votes or hearings are included in the provided record, there is no formal legislative sentiment to measure from committee action. Based on the text, the bill appears to be framed as a national security and supply-chain protection measure, with supporters likely emphasizing economic resilience, countering unfair trade, and reducing reliance on China. The broad tariff increases, the possibility of import bans, and the expanded CFIUS authority suggest the bill is highly interventionist and would likely draw concern from importers, consumer groups, and businesses that rely on Chinese inputs or lower-cost foreign goods.
The main points of contention are likely to be the scale and breadth of the tariff increases, the potential for higher consumer prices, the executive branch discretion to adjust duties and prohibit imports, and the expanded national-security screening of foreign investment. Another likely issue is the bill’s treatment of China as a special category for customs valuation and tariffs, which could raise concerns about retaliation, trade disruption, and administrative complexity for Customs, the International Trade Commission, and importers.
If enacted, HB4978 would substantially amend federal tariff, customs valuation, and foreign investment review law. It would add a new general import duty, alter the Harmonized Tariff Schedule for China-specific rates, require new customs procedures for Chinese merchandise valuation, and expand CFIUS jurisdiction under the Defense Production Act to cover certain real-estate-based greenfield and brownfield investments by foreign countries of concern. The bill would directly affect importers, customs brokers, U.S. consumers, domestic manufacturers, and foreign investors, while giving the President and executive agencies significant new implementation and enforcement responsibilities.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to summarize. From the bill text alone, the measure is clearly pro-tariff and pro-restriction, reflecting a strong national-security and industrial-policy approach to trade. Its framing suggests support from lawmakers concerned about China, supply-chain dependence, and strategic industries, while likely opposition from trade-sensitive businesses, import-dependent sectors, and advocates of lower tariffs and freer trade.
The most likely points of contention are the across-the-board 10 percent import duty, the much higher China-specific tariff floors, and the bill’s authorization for the President to impose quotas or ban imports based on national security, unfair trade, or human-rights findings. Critics may object to higher consumer costs, retaliation risk, and broad executive discretion; supporters are likely to argue the bill is necessary to protect domestic industry, secure supply chains, and counter Chinese trade practices. The CFIUS expansion to greenfield and brownfield investments by foreign countries of concern may also be controversial because it broadens federal scrutiny of foreign capital and real-estate development.