What did USTR actually announce on May 6, 2026?

USTR formally kicked off the second statutory four-year review of the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports. According to Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg's May 6, 2026 report, USTR is notifying domestic-industry representatives that benefit from the July 6, 2018 and August 23, 2018 Section 301 actions of the opportunity to request continuation. Continuation requests for the July 6, 2018 action are due May 7-July 5, 2026. Continuation requests for the August 23, 2018 action are due June 24-August 22, 2026. If continuation requests are received, USTR will then run a separate comment-period review.

Are Section 301 tariffs the same as the IEEPA tariffs CAPE is refunding?

No. Section 301 China tariffs were imposed under the Trade Act of 1974 and were not affected by the Supreme Court's IEEPA ruling in Learning Resources v. Trump. They have remained in effect throughout. CAPE Phase 1 refunds only the IEEPA layer of the duty stack on entries between February 2025 and February 2026. For how the layers interact on a single entry summary, see our IEEPA, Section 301, and Section 232 stacking explainer.

Does the four-year review affect my CAPE refund timing or amount?

Not directly. The CAPE refund covers IEEPA duties already paid; the Section 301 review is forward-looking and concerns whether the Section 301 actions continue. The two tracks run in parallel. The reason to follow the review is operational: if Section 301 tariffs are continued or expanded, the all-in cost on China entries stays elevated even after IEEPA refunds land, which changes sourcing and pricing decisions that are often made the same week the refund arrives.

What is the realistic outcome of the four-year review?

The first four-year review concluded with the Section 301 actions being continued. USTR has opened the same statutory process again. Continuation is the historical baseline outcome when domestic-industry representatives request it; termination would require either no continuation request or a USTR finding that the actions are no longer effective. Importers should plan around continuation as the working assumption and monitor the comment phase for product-specific exclusion or modification opportunities.

What should an importer do today?

Three things. First, finish the CAPE filing for any entries still in Phase 1 scope and confirm ACH disbursement landed (use the ES-022, REV-603, and REV-615 reports). Second, calendar the four-year-review milestones: continuation-request windows close July 5 and August 22, and any subsequent comment portal will be announced via Federal Register notice. Third, work with trade counsel on whether any of your Chinese-origin product lines are candidates for exclusion or tariff-line modification comments during the review's comment phase.

Section 301 China Tariff Comeback: Action Items After Your IEEPA Refund

USTR formally launched the second statutory four-year review of the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports on May 6, 2026. For importers who just finished filing their CAPE Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) declarations and are watching for their IEEPA refund to land, the review is a different track entirely — but the timeline matters, and the operational implications hit the same finance team that is reconciling the IEEPA refund.

Stacked shipping containers symbolizing layered Section 301 and IEEPA tariffs

This post explains what USTR announced, why Section 301 sits separately from IEEPA, and what to do in the next 60 days.

What USTR Actually Announced

According to Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg’s May 6, 2026 trade report, USTR is formally notifying representatives of domestic industries that benefit from two prior Section 301 actions of the opportunity to request continuation of the actions:

July 6, 2018 action — continuation requests due May 7 to July 5, 2026
August 23, 2018 action (as modified) — continuation requests due June 24 to August 22, 2026

USTR is also notifying by email industry associations and labor groups that submitted continuation requests during the first four-year review. After this notification phase, USTR will announce in subsequent notices whether continuation requests were received. If any are received, USTR will run a separate review under Section 307(c)(3) of the Trade Act, including a comment portal where interested parties can comment on the effectiveness of the action, alternative actions, and the effects on the U.S. economy and consumers.

In other words, today’s announcement is the first procedural step in a multi-stage process. The substantive comment period — the one that matters most to importers and where exclusion or modification arguments get made — comes later.

Why Section 301 Is Not the Same as IEEPA

The two regimes look similar from a payment perspective (both are extra duties on Chinese-origin merchandise) but they sit on completely different legal foundations:

Regime	Statute	Status today
Section 301 China duties	Trade Act of 1974, § 301	In effect; subject to the 2026 four-year review
IEEPA “fentanyl” tariff on China	International Emergency Economic Powers Act	Struck down February 20, 2026 by Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump; refundable through CAPE Phase 1

The Supreme Court’s IEEPA ruling did not reach Section 301. That is why CAPE refunds only the IEEPA layer of the duty stack on a given entry, not the Section 301 layer. We cover the line-by-line separation in our IEEPA, Section 301, and Section 232 stacking guide.

The practical takeaway: an importer can be in the May 11 IEEPA refund wave and still owe ongoing Section 301 duties on every new China entry. Those are two different money flows on the same merchandise.

How the Review Interacts With Your IEEPA Refund

The CAPE refund is backward-looking — it returns IEEPA duties paid between February 2025 and February 2026. The four-year review is forward-looking — it determines whether the Section 301 China tariffs continue at their current rates beyond their statutory anniversary.

For most CAPE filers, that means three things land on the same finance team in the same quarter:

IEEPA refund deposits through ACH (use ES-022, REV-603, REV-613, and REV-615 to track them)
Continuing Section 301 duty payments on every new China entry shipped after the refund period
Forward planning around whether Section 301 will continue, expand, or be modified after the four-year review

Conflating these is one of the most common reconciliation mistakes. The refund landing in your account does not reduce your forward duty exposure on China sourcing; it only returns the IEEPA portion of past entries. We cover other reasons refund deposits surprise filers in our refund estimate mismatch post.

Action Items for the Next 60 Days

A short, dated checklist:

1. Finish the CAPE refund work first

Refund disbursements are expected to begin on or around May 11, 2026 per Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg’s reporting and a CIT closed-conference summary referenced by Diaz Trade Law on May 1. Make sure your CAPE Phase 1 filing is complete, your ACH refund account is live, and your monitoring reports are scheduled. See our May 11 readiness post.

2. Calendar the Section 301 review milestones

July 5, 2026 — last day for domestic-industry continuation requests on the July 6, 2018 action
August 22, 2026 — last day for domestic-industry continuation requests on the August 23, 2018 action
Subsequent USTR notice — comment portal opens if continuation is requested; this is the importer-facing window

3. Identify product lines that are candidates for the comment phase

If any of your China-origin products are sourced under a tariff line where domestic capacity has changed since 2018, where exclusion was previously granted and lapsed, or where downstream U.S. manufacturers depend on the input, those are typical exclusion or modification candidates. Build the file now so you can submit during the comment phase rather than scramble.

4. Keep the multi-channel refund posture for IEEPA

Even with refunds imminent, keep filing protective protests under 19 USC § 1514 within 180 days of liquidation for any IEEPA-affected entries that are not in CAPE Phase 1 scope, and assess whether a CIT path applies to entries that already finally liquidated. See CAPE, protest, or CIT — which path fits your entries.

Where This Goes From Here

USTR will announce in subsequent notices whether continuation requests were received and, if so, will open a comment-period review. The comment phase is where importers, trade associations, and downstream manufacturers can argue for exclusions, tariff-line modifications, or termination on specific product categories. Historically, that phase has produced narrow but real outcomes — selective exclusions and rate adjustments — even where the broader Section 301 framework was continued.

Importers who finished CAPE filing already have the operational muscle for this work: they know which HTS lines they ship, what duty stack hits each line, and which entries are most affected. Pivoting that infrastructure from refund recovery to forward-looking advocacy in the four-year review is the natural next step for finance and compliance teams.

Want a vetted trade-law professional to map your Section 301 exposure alongside your IEEPA refund position? Get a free assessment → — we will route you to a specialist based on your sourcing footprint and refund timeline.