ITCO Submission to USTR Section 301
A few weeks ago, we undertook an initiative to provide a regular flow of information to our Members regarding the US trade tariff developments, and the potential impact on the tank container industry.
We now wish to inform you of the action taken by ITCO in response to the US Trade Representative’s (USTR) investigation under Section 301 of China’s targeting of the maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding sectors for dominance.
As Members are probably aware, in addition to measures regarding operators of Chinese built and operated vessels, the USTR is proposing to implement tariffs on Chinese-built ship-to-shore cranes, and other cargo handling equipment – including chassis and tank containers – under HTSUS 8609.00.00. These tariffs range from 20% to 100%. The USTR has requested written comments on the proposed tariffs and ITCO has submitted a response.
ITCO has presented itself as a world-wide industry association representing tank container lessors, operators, manufacturers, depots and inspection companies, with a strong presence in the United States. The ITCO members control a large proportion of the current global fleet of more that 850,000 tanks with a value of approximately USD 10 billion.
ITCO has argued that tank containers are an instrument of trade and a means of product containment, are reusable, and due to their robust construction, have a life span of up to 25 years. The tanks are designed to carry a range of liquid, gas, and powder cargoes in domestic and international service, and purpose designed for inter-modal traffic.
ITCO members’ portable tank containers, intermodal and IMO tanks all fall under the subheading 8609.00.00 and ITCO has respectfully requested the removal of these items from the proposed 20% to 100% tariff.
ITCO has pointed out that there is no domestic production of tank containers in the USA; and that at no time in the past has local production represented more than a small fraction of global demand. Today, approximately 90% of all tanks are produced in China. For the USA to be able to compete, in terms of scale and cost, it would certainly require an extended lead-time as well as some form of subsidy. Therefore, any tariff on imported tanks would represent a significant burden on local, domestic, operators versus other forms of transport.
ITCO understands that tanks imported into the USA for purely domestic business could be subject to some form of tariff, based on steel content etc. However, the majority of all tanks are engaged in international traffic, and normally operate under a 90-day tariff-free window. The product shipped in the container may be subjected to its own tariff schedule (or the arriving vessel transporting the container may be subjected to tariffs based on gross tonnage, number of containers, ownership of the vessel, or vessel build). Therefore, any additional tariff on the container would represent a form of double taxation, or be redundant. ITCO also pointed out that tanks may enter the USA on numerous occasions and therefore repeated tariff opportunity also appears to be both unreasonable and redundant.
ITCO’s comprehensive response was submitted on time to the USTR before May 19, 2025. We very much appreciate the contribution from Jim Silver and Matt Caldwell in preparing the submission.
Members may view the submission – click on this link: USTR SECTION 301 SUBMISSION
Paul Gooch
President
ITCO – International Tank Container Organisation
www.itco.org
