Over the past several weeks, President Trump issued Executive Orders instructing the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) to investigate the effects of copper and wood product imports, respectively, on national security, pursuant to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (“Section 232”). Investigations were formally launched on Monday.
Today, Commerce released notice of opportunities for public comment in the copper and wood product investigations. The scope of Commerce’s request suggests a broad scope for each investigation. Parties that might be affected by trade action — e.g., tariffs, quotas, or tariff-rate quotas (permitting a certain quantity under a reduced tariff rate) — affecting imports of copper and timber should consider submitting comments, data, or analyses.
The Scope of the Investigations
Commerce’s request for information confirms that it will examine the national security effects of imported copper “in all forms, including but not limited to, raw mined copper, copper concentrates, refined copper, copper alloys, scrap copper, and derivative products.” Similarly, regarding wood products, Commerce’s request for comment confirms that it will examine the national security effects of imported “timber, lumber, and their derivative products.”
Neither notice provides further detail concerning the likely scope of “derivative products” subject to either investigation, which interested parties may wish to comment upon.
Request for Comments
Commerce has requested that interested parties frame comments in terms of the standards set forth in 15 C.F.R. § 705.4. Specifically, parties are invited to submit written comments, data, analyses, or other information that addresses:
For Both Copper and Wood Products
- Demand:
- the current and projected demand for copper in the United States defense, energy, and critical infrastructure sectors;
- the current and projected demand for timber and lumber in the United States;
- Domestic Capacity:
- the extent to which domestic production, smelting, refining, and recycling can meet demand;
- the extent to which domestic production of timber and lumber can meet domestic demand;
- Feasibility of Increasing Domestic Capacity:
- the feasibility of increasing domestic copper mining, smelting, and refining capacity to reduce import reliance;
- the feasibility of increasing domestic timber and lumber capacity to reduce imports;
- Foreign Supply Chains: the role of foreign supply chains, particularly from major exporters, in meeting United States demand for copper, timber, and lumber;
- Foreign Government Practices:
- the impact of foreign government copper subsidies, overcapacity, and predatory trade practices on the United States copper industry competitiveness;
- the impact of foreign government subsidies and predatory trade practices on United States timber, lumber, and derivative product industry competitiveness;
- Domestic Trade Policies: the impact of current trade policies on domestic copper, timber, lumber, and derivative product production and whether additional measures, including tariffs or quotas, are necessary to protect national security.
Additional Topics Specific to Copper
- Import Concentration: the concentration of United States copper imports from a small number of suppliers and the associated risks;
- Price Suppression: the economic impact of artificially suppressed copper prices due to dumping and state-sponsored overproduction;
- Export Restrictions: the potential for export restrictions by foreign nations, including the ability of foreign nations to weaponize their control over refined copper supplies;
Copper investigation comments may be submitted via regulations.gov by April 1, 2025 (Docket No. BIS-2025-0010, Ref. No. X-RIN 0694-XC116).
Timber investigation comments may be submitted via regulations.gov by April 1, 2025 (Docket No. BIS-2025-0011, Rev. No. X-RIN 0694-XC117).
Opportunity to Participate
Judging from Commerce’s past Section 232 reports, information provided to Commerce during the course of these public comments will inform Commerce’s analysis of the national security implications relevant to these products, as well as the remedial trade actions that Commerce ultimately recommends. Although Commerce has up to 270 days to complete these investigations, the brevity of the public comment periods and the lack of a hearing notice suggest an inclination to move quickly, perhaps utilizing less than the full statutory period, meaning interested parties may choose to act now in response to these opportunities. Cassidy Levy Kent has experience advising parties participating in Section 232 investigations, preparing Section 232 comments for agency consideration, and otherwise developing strategies for engagement.