We hereby submit comments on the above-captioned investigations initiated by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. §§ 2411–2420). These comments explain the evidence and analysis that are required to impose remedial measures in response to “structural excess capacity” (SEC) in the foreign economies under consideration. We primarily focus on capacity utilization and other related evidence of structural excess capacity, leaving the examination of alleged macroeconomic indicators, such as a nation’s trade balance, to other submissions. As our comments make clear, USTR faces significant evidentiary and methodological challenges to demonstrate that remedial measures are necessary and lawful in this case.

Section II outlines the evidentiary framework USTR must employ to impose remedial tariffs or other government restrictions on U.S. trade and/​or investment. Section III discusses the limitations of various capacity utilization data, and Section IV addresses USTR’s proposed 80 percent utilization benchmark, as well as the incomparability of capacity utilization data across different economies. Section V concludes and is followed by annexes containing additional data and evidence for the record in these investigations.