Trade and Tariff Update: USMCA Uncertainty, Tariff Refund Progress, China Port Fees, and India Negotiations
1. President Trump Questions USMCA Renewal Ahead of July Review
President Donald Trump stated on June 10 that he has no interest in renewing the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), arguing that the United States does not depend on imports from Canada or Mexico and that both countries “have to treat us much better.”
The first six-year joint review of USMCA is scheduled to begin July 1. Despite the president’s comments, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has begun formal negotiations with Mexico. USTR Greer is leading the U.S. delegation, while Mexican Economic Minister Marcelo Ebrard is leading Mexico’s delegation. A further round of discussions is expected in Washington, D.C.
Canada has not yet entered comparable bilateral negotiations, although Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc recently met with Ambassador Greer in Washington in an effort to restart informal discussions.
Why it matters: USMCA provides an essential framework for trade and travel across North America. Canada and Mexico are among the most important international markets for U.S. exhibitions, conferences, and business events, including cross-border exhibitors, attendees, suppliers, and service providers. Uncertainty surrounding the agreement’s future could disrupt supply chains, increase costs for goods moving across the borders, and create new barriers for companies planning events throughout the region.
2. CBP Announces Next Phase of IEEPA Tariff Refund System
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has announced plans to launch Phase Two of its Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries, or CAPE, program on June 29.
CAPE was established after the Supreme Court struck down the administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs. The program is being deployed in phases to process refund requests associated with those tariffs.
Phase One, launched April 20, allows CBP to process certain unliquidated entries and entries liquidated within the previous 80 days. However, it does not cover entries that have reached final liquidation or more complicated cases involving antidumping and countervailing duties.
Phase Two will expand CAPE to include entries undergoing reconciliation. Reconciliation allows importers to file entry summaries using their best available information while flagging estimated elements that will be finalized later. These cases are considered more complex and could not be processed during the first phase.
CBP has also indicated that Phase Three will eventually process entries that have reached final liquidation. According to the agency, the first three phases of CAPE are expected to cover approximately 90% of all IEEPA duties paid, although CBP has not announced a timeline for the final phase.
Why it matters: Event-industry companies that directly imported goods subject to IEEPA-based tariffs may be eligible for refunds, but the process remains gradual and complicated. Exhibitors, general service contractors, suppliers, and other importers should continue reviewing their entries and consulting customs professionals, particularly when their imports involve reconciliations, antidumping duties, countervailing duties, or final liquidation.
3. Senate Democrats Urge Return of Section 301 Port Fees on Chinese Vessels
Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Mark Kelly of Nevada have urged USTR Jamieson Greer to reinstate Section 301 port fees on Chinese vessels docking at U.S. ports.
The fees were briefly in effect in October 2025 before being suspended as part of the Busan Agreement between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The fees were based on a Section 301 investigation into China’s shipbuilding industry, which found that Chinese industrial subsidies and non-market policies disadvantaged U.S. shipbuilding companies and workers.
In their letter, Sens. Warren and Kelly argued that pausing the fees conflicts with the administration’s stated goal of strengthening domestic manufacturing and shipbuilding. They also asked USTR to explain how it plans to ensure that the suspension does not delay efforts to rebuild U.S. shipbuilding capacity.
Last year, ECA successfully lobbied for the suspension of the port fees and opposes their potential return.
Why it matters: Port fees and other shipping-related trade actions can affect the cost and reliability of imported goods. For the business and professional events industry, higher maritime costs could increase prices for imported exhibit materials, technology, furniture, promotional products, and other event-related supplies. Any renewed fees on Chinese vessels could also add further uncertainty for companies already managing complex international supply chains.
4. India and United States Aim to Finalize Initial Trade Agreement by Mid-July
India’s Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal has said that India and the United States could finalize the first tranche of a bilateral trade agreement around mid-July.
According to Goyal, the two countries have held several productive rounds of discussions, and a higher-level U.S. delegation, potentially including USTR Jamieson Greer, is expected to travel to India for formal negotiations at the end of June. Goyal indicated that an initial agreement could provide India with preferential access compared with competing markets.
The negotiations are occurring while India remains subject to a proposed 12.5% tariff under a separate Section 301 investigation concerning forced labor. India’s Ministry of Commerce and Industry has stated that it is engaging with the United States both through the Section 301 process and through the parallel negotiations on a framework agreement.
Why it matters: India is an increasingly important market for U.S. exhibitions, conferences, and other business events. A bilateral agreement could help strengthen commercial ties and support the movement of goods, services, exhibitors, and attendees between the two countries. However, the prospect of new Section 301 tariffs underscores the continuing uncertainty facing companies with supply-chain or market exposure to India.
