Trump's 2026 trade agenda faces Senate scrutiny

[0:00] using a provision based in the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930. [0:07] Americans ought to know that nobody, not even Herbert Hoover, [0:13] used this provision before, but Donald Trump dug up a zombie law [0:18] to make things even more expensive for Americans. [0:21] Trump's next trade scheme is ordering USTR to reconstruct his illegal global tariffs [0:26] under the guise of addressing forced labor. [0:29] As I've recently said, if the administration wants to get serious about forced labor, [0:35] the first step is to look at its own enforcement record. [0:38] Donald Trump has failed to enforce the laws that we've got in the books [0:42] and has cut government efforts dedicated to fighting forced labor around the world. [0:47] Ambassador Greer, at our hearing last year, [0:50] you told us that nearly 50 countries had approached you [0:54] and those countries were clamoring for trade deals. [0:58] Instead of agreements, what I've seen is we have press releases [1:02] and announcements about supposed deals that haven't been approved by Congress, [1:08] haven't been enforced, haven't opened markets, and haven't reduced tariffs. [1:12] My own take on these proposals is there is no there there. [1:17] The one piece of the Trump administration trade agenda that does seem to be progressing [1:22] is the corrupt enrichment of so many in the Trump orbit, [1:27] his family, his allies, and himself. [1:30] Donald Trump lowered tariffs on Switzerland [1:32] after Swiss billionaires gifted Trump a gold bar worth more than $100,000. [1:38] A Korean company under investigation for trade cheating paid the Trump holding company $2 million. [1:44] And the administration waived export restrictions on the UAE [1:49] after an Emirati company invested $500 million in the Trump cryptocurrency agenda. [1:56] I could go on. [1:57] We've got a busy morning. [1:59] The bottom line is American families are paying more in tariffs [2:03] so Donald Trump and his cronies can profit. [2:08] My own take is the way to stop this corruption and chaos [2:10] is to take unfettered tariff power away from the president. [2:15] It's well past time to put Congress back in the driver's seat on trade. [2:20] That's why today I'm able to introduce the Congressional Trade Powers Reform Act. [2:26] It overhauls existing trade powers to ensure [2:29] that no future presidential administration can abuse its authority on trade [2:34] and thrust the country into a cost-of-living crisis. [2:38] It would require congressional approval [2:41] of any tariff proposed by the president. [2:44] And it would establish an advisory committee [2:46] to ensure that Congress actually is in a position [2:49] to exercise its rightful oversight over tariffs and trade. [2:53] It is time to restore consistency, reliability, [2:57] and success in our country's trade agenda. [3:00] That's what my bill is all about [3:02] and I look forward to talking to colleagues [3:04] on both sides of the aisle on that. [3:05] I look forward to today's question and answer. [3:07] Ambassador, we're glad you're here as I've said [3:09] and please proceed. [3:12] Thank you, Ranking Member Wyden, [3:14] Chairman Crapo, Senator Bennett and the rest of the committee. [3:17] I also thank you for keeping in touch with me [3:19] as USTR has prioritized our consultations with Congress [3:22] during this busy time for trade policy. [3:24] As you know, the president's trade policy in 2025 [3:27] was characterized by a national emergency, [3:29] a $1.2 trillion trade deficit [3:31] which had exploded 40% in the prior four years [3:36] and an industrial base too atrophied to support [3:38] our national security and economic competitiveness adequately, [3:41] let alone support a strong middle class. [3:43] That national emergency still persists [3:45] and so our policy remains the same. [3:47] The specific authorities this administration is using [3:49] have changed, but the trade strategy has not. [3:52] We are committed to continuing to use tariffs [3:55] and to negotiate deals to support the re-industrialization [3:58] of our economy, protect American workers and increase their wages [4:02] and shrink our trade deficit. [4:04] The problems the president's trade policy [4:05] seeks to solve are generational. [4:07] These things were not broken in a day [4:09] and they won't be fixed overnight, [4:10] but they must be fixed. [4:12] This is why I'm pleased to report [4:13] that the combination of tariffs and deals [4:15] core to the president's trade policy [4:17] has yielded quick and impressive results. [4:19] For starters, the United States currently has 19 framework [4:22] or reciprocal trade deals [4:23] covering 32% of global gross domestic product. [4:27] Here's one in my hand. [4:28] It's the deal with Indonesia. [4:29] It's substantive. [4:30] There are annexes. [4:31] There are tariff schedules of all the things [4:33] that they'll be reducing for the United States [4:35] and I have a dozen more deals like this. [4:38] The new market access secured in these deals [4:40] and the protection they offer from unfair trade practices [4:42] has been a boon to our producers. [4:44] Goods and services exports have marked the highest [4:46] monthly levels on record in American history [4:49] from February through May of this year. [4:51] Everyone said trade would collapse. [4:53] We've never exported as much as we are now. [4:55] And on the other side of the ledger, [4:56] capital goods represent the largest share of our imports [4:59] ever, accounting for 33% of imports in 2025 [5:02] and 40% so far this year. [5:04] In other words, [5:05] we've shifted the bulk of our imports [5:07] from consumer goods and autos [5:09] to things we need to scale reindustrialization [5:11] like machine tools, injection molding equipment [5:13] and computing equipment. [5:14] In other words, [5:15] the United States has not stopped trading with the world [5:17] but the composition of that trade has changed [5:19] in a way that benefits Americans. [5:21] We're selling more to the world than ever before [5:23] because of our increased capacity to produce [5:25] and our imports are increasingly the type of goods [5:27] that help us produce even more here in America. [5:29] And these dynamics [5:30] have helped reduce our trade deficit. [5:32] After the introduction [5:33] of the president's reciprocal trade program [5:35] in April 2025, [5:36] the U.S. trade deficit in goods for the 12 months [5:38] ending in May 2026 decreased by 24% [5:42] compared with the same period a year earlier. [5:44] Instead of an average annual 8% increase [5:46] in the trade deficit we experienced [5:48] under President Biden in 2025 [5:50] under President Trump [5:51] that rate of increase slowed substantially [5:53] and now it's being reversed. [5:54] For agricultural trade specifically [5:56] the story is even better. [5:57] President Biden left office [5:58] with a monthly ag trade deficit [6:00] of 6.2 billion. [6:01] Under President Trump, [6:02] it's under 3 billion [6:04] and we are on the road [6:05] to an agricultural trade surplus again. [6:07] Services exports [6:08] have also taken advantage [6:09] of new market access. [6:10] In 2025, [6:11] the U.S. services trade surplus [6:12] reached a record high [6:13] of 327 billion. [6:15] A large part of the positive change [6:17] in our trade deficit [6:18] is due to reduced dependence on China. [6:20] Our trade deficit in goods with China [6:22] fell to 200 billion in 2025, [6:24] the lowest it's been since 2005 [6:27] and China's share of total U.S. imports [6:29] fell to about 9%, [6:30] the lowest it has been [6:32] since China joined the World Trade Organization [6:34] in 2001. [6:35] So these trends are good for our economy [6:37] and our national security [6:38] but they're really good [6:39] for the individual workers [6:40] and the families [6:41] who make up that economy. [6:42] Real manufacturing worker pay [6:44] has increased by over $2,000 [6:46] under President Trump [6:47] after falling over $800 [6:50] during President Biden's [6:51] four years in office. [6:52] Manufacturing productivity [6:53] surged by 2.4% [6:55] in the last quarter of 2025 [6:56] compared to the same period in 2024 [6:58] and manufacturing wages [7:00] increased by 4.7%. [7:02] In other words, [7:02] the average American manufacturing worker [7:04] is producing more goods [7:05] and getting paid more to do it [7:07] and there are over half a million [7:08] open manufacturing jobs. [7:10] So there's a lot of opportunity here. [7:12] In June, the consumer price index fell 0.4%, [7:15] the largest decline since April 2020 [7:17] and far below the expectations [7:19] of a 1.1% drop. [7:21] Core inflation was 2.6% year over year [7:24] down from 3.3% in January of 2025 [7:27] and again, better than market expectations. [7:29] I'm looking forward today [7:30] to talking to you more [7:31] about our Section 301 investigations, [7:34] about where we are with USMCA, [7:36] about our critical minerals [7:38] and a variety of other initiatives that we have. [7:40] And I really just want to close with this thought. [7:44] Fundamentally, all of these initiatives [7:45] and the trade policy overall [7:47] aim to answer the question [7:48] of what should our economy look like. [7:50] For President Trump and his administration, [7:52] the answer is clear. [7:53] We want an economy that is resilient from shocks [7:56] and not dependent on foreign production [7:58] for critical goods. [7:59] We want an economy with an increased level [8:01] of manufacturing, [8:02] certainty of food security [8:03] and a robust services sector. [8:05] We want an economy benefiting from an international [8:08] economic system that promotes fairness and balance. [8:11] We want an economy that prioritizes American workers [8:14] by protecting them from unfair trading practices [8:16] and create economic conditions [8:17] that raise their wages. [8:18] An economy that looks like this [8:20] is one everyone supports, I'm sure. [8:22] And I look forward to our conversation today [8:24] and working with you [8:25] to continue to make this economic vision a reality. [8:28] Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. [8:30] Let me start with the proposition [8:32] that it just seems to me [8:34] that on tariffs the administration has lost the plot. [8:38] And in particular, [8:39] let's look at what happened in the last couple of days. [8:42] Just a few days ago, [8:43] Canada, our closest neighbor, [8:45] basically learned they were going to get 50%, [8:47] you know, tariffs. [8:49] At the same time, when it comes to China, [8:51] one of the biggest trade cheats there is, [8:53] it seems that the administration rolls out the red carpet. [8:56] You're standing up a so-called board of trade [8:59] to lower tariffs on goods from China. [9:01] It looks like you've thrown in the towel. [9:03] So a couple of questions, yes or no. [9:06] When the new tariff on Canada takes effect, [9:09] will Canada have higher tariffs than China on some products? [9:14] On a small handful, [9:18] China's by far much higher than Canada overall, [9:21] by far, no question. [9:23] Well, let me work through that, you know, math. [9:27] I mean, the 50% tariff is higher than a number of tariffs on China. [9:32] So we have 100% tariffs on EVs coming in from China. [9:37] We have about 45% to 50% on most things coming in from China. [9:40] We have a small handful of goods, [9:42] about $20 billion worth of goods coming in from Canada. [9:45] All the steel and aluminum from China, [9:46] well over 50%, some in triple digits. [9:48] The question is, [9:50] are there some areas [9:52] where the Canadian tariffs are higher than China's? [9:55] And it seems to me that 50% is the accurate one. [9:57] We can do an analysis [9:59] because we have stacking tariffs on China [10:01] that don't apply to other countries. [10:02] So we're happy to get back to you. [10:03] But overall, China is by far subject to very high tariffs. [10:08] We'll look forward to having that information on the record [10:11] because our staff believes that there are instances [10:14] where the Canadians are going to pay higher tariffs [10:18] than the Chinese are, and that's not right. [10:20] I want to ask next about something [10:22] that really has been an interest of mine [10:24] since my days with the Great Panthers, [10:26] and that's the whole question of pharma prices. [10:28] You negotiate an agreement with the U.K. [10:30] for their government to pay drug companies [10:32] 25% more money for new medicine. [10:35] So it looks to me, [10:36] and this is a field that I've worked in for a long time, [10:39] you negotiate a deal to put more money [10:41] into the pockets of big pharma, [10:43] and it just looks like the drug companies, again, [10:46] are just getting ahead. [10:48] Now, Trump claims that this extra money for big pharma [10:51] is going to somehow lower drug costs [10:53] for patients in the United States, [10:55] but the deals between big pharma [10:58] and the Trump administration are completely secret. [11:02] And it seems to me if they were such good deals [11:05] for people, it would be public. [11:07] So my question to you is, and I'd like your answer again [11:11] as a yes or no, will you push for release [11:15] of the written agreements with these pharmaceutical companies now? [11:18] So, Senator, the domestic deals, [11:22] I don't have jurisdiction over those, [11:24] so I don't have any role to play in that. [11:27] Our deal with the UK is public. [11:28] But the question was, I need people in the administration [11:31] who have responsibility in trade [11:33] to push for the release of these written details. [11:37] So this is a question of yes or no, [11:40] will you use your office to push for release of that written data [11:44] because you've been involved in some aspects of pharmaceuticals? [11:47] For our deals with foreign countries, they're public. [11:50] If there's a domestic deal between a domestic company [11:53] to lower prices, that's up to other agencies, [11:56] HHS and others. [11:57] I'm happy to bring your concern back to those agencies [11:59] because I want to work with you on this. [12:00] I'm glad you're bringing my concern, [12:02] but again, we'll talk some more about it, I think. [12:05] I want to make sure that people in the administration [12:07] are pushing for release of that data. [12:10] The American people have a right to know. [12:12] Frankly, if they were actually lowering prices for consumers, [12:15] I think it'd be trumpeted from the mountaintop, [12:18] but I want people in the administration [12:19] who are going to push for that release. [12:21] We'll talk further about it. [12:22] Mr. Chairman, where we are is, [12:24] I finished my opening statement and my questions, [12:27] and we have a list of members in order of appearance. [12:31] I get to go next? [12:32] I gather we may be able to give you the power. [12:34] All right. [12:35] Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Wyden. [12:41] Again, I'm sorry I had to step out, [12:43] but I do have your opening statement, [12:46] and I'm familiar with your statement. [12:49] My first question, Ambassador, [12:52] is that during our committee's February USMCA hearing, [12:56] my colleagues made clear on a bipartisan basis [12:59] that the USMCA is vital to our economy [13:01] and should be fully enforced. [13:03] What do you view as a realistic timeline [13:06] for conclusion of the USMCA negotiations [13:08] that are currently underway, [13:10] keeping in mind the importance of business certainty? [13:13] Thank you, Chairman, [13:16] and I appreciate the frequent conversations we've had, [13:20] both you and I and with the committee on USMCA. [13:24] After this hearing, I'm actually flying down to Mexico City [13:27] to meet with President Scheinbaum, [13:29] to meet with Secretary Obrard. [13:32] The team is down there negotiating, [13:34] so we're moving with all due speed on all of this. [13:37] There are some issues in USMCA [13:41] which take a longer time to address, [13:43] issues that are quite important. [13:45] Some of these are related to rules of origin. [13:47] We want rules of origin in USMCA to be very strong [13:51] to incentivize production in North America, [13:53] as opposed to other regions that have a lot of excess capacity [13:56] or non-market practices. [13:57] But it does take time to develop these. [14:00] Similarly, I've heard from folks also in Congress [14:03] about the need to strengthen labor and environment enforcement [14:06] vis-à-vis Mexico. [14:07] This can take time as well. [14:09] That being said, I'm hopeful that before the end of the year, [14:13] we can have at least options for President Trump [14:16] and the leaders of Canada and or Mexico [14:18] to consider potential interim arrangements [14:22] or things that Canada can do on the one hand [14:25] and Mexico can do on the other hand [14:27] to strengthen enforcement, [14:29] to improve their commitments toward us [14:31] and to make sure that we're managing all of the trade issues. [14:33] So I would love to have between now and the end of the year [14:36] at least some arrangements, one with Canada, one with Mexico, [14:39] and then some of these issues that are really important, [14:42] like rules of origin. [14:43] I know labor environment is important to a lot of folks here [14:45] that take a little more time to have further discussion [14:48] of that, including with Congress, in the following year. [14:50] Thank you. [14:52] And I appreciate your focus on this. [14:54] It's a very high priority for us. [14:57] Next, market access for U.S. agriculture exports [15:01] is also, as you know, one of my top priorities. [15:04] The administration's agreements on reciprocal trade [15:07] include many very important market access provisions. [15:11] Could you provide a status update on the implementation [15:14] and entry into force of these agreements? [15:18] Certainly. [15:19] So some countries, such as Argentina and Cambodia, [15:25] have already started the process of removing tariffs. [15:28] Cambodia, for example, [15:29] has already removed all of its tariffs for us. [15:31] We have some smaller markets that maybe are not huge for us, [15:34] like North Macedonia, that they've removed all of their tariffs. [15:37] I had the Malaysian trade minister in my office yesterday, [15:40] and we talked about their timeframe. [15:42] You know, they're looking to the fall to put through the changes. [15:46] Again, they're reducing all of their tariffs to zero. [15:49] They're removing non-tariff barriers that have been a problem [15:53] for us for a long time. [15:54] Indonesia is in a similar position of in the fall, [15:57] looking to implement fully all of their commitments. [16:00] So we have a number of these agreements in place. [16:03] We have, you know, we have an agreement with Jordan we signed yesterday. [16:07] They've already taken action to further liberalize their market toward us. [16:12] We have Israel that has just passed in the Knesset an agreement to accept American standards. [16:18] So a variety of these countries have already implemented. [16:21] Others are going through their domestic processes. [16:23] And of course, importantly, we had the EU that lowered their industrial tariffs to zero [16:27] and provided a number of tariff rate quotas for American farmers earlier this month. [16:33] Thank you. And finally, what assurances and steps is USTR seeking and taking to ensure that these commitments are durable and enforced over time? [16:46] So this word enforcement enforcement is so important to our administration. [16:52] I know it's important to this committee and and trade enforcement. [16:57] It means tariffs when you even when you have dispute settlement or a formal process that goes on for years. [17:02] At the end of the day, if you win a tariff is the implementing sanction if folks don't do this. [17:07] So we expect these companies, these countries to implement. [17:11] We expect in the future that these countries will retain these agreements because they've made them to the United States of America. [17:17] As long as I'm here, you can count on me to use whatever tools I have, whether it's Section 301 or other tools to enforce these agreements. [17:23] My hope would be that any successor would take the same strong approach to enforcing these agreements and promises. [17:28] Thank you. Senator Grassley. [17:30] Senator Grassley. [17:31] And agriculture are very much a problem for the family farmer. [17:43] And I want to compliment the president for delaying the 18 percent duties on Morocco phosphate coming into our country so that Mosaic has some competition. [18:03] They got 85 percent of the market already. [18:06] We have two suppliers of anhydrous ammonia in America. [18:13] So can we get a commitment to working with our trading partners to increase the availability of fertilizer generally for U.S. farmers. [18:24] But most importantly, removing any tariffs on anhydrous ammonia. [18:29] In other words, we got to get a bigger supplier. [18:34] You just can't have two companies dominate in the whole market of nitrogen for corn farmers. [18:41] Thank you, Senator. [18:43] And I know this has been an important issue for you throughout the program that the president's had. [18:49] He has he's been very nuanced on the fertilizer supply chain. [18:53] We'll continue to work with you to make sure if there are areas where you think we need more nuance, we'll do that. [18:58] So we appreciate your attention to this. [19:01] We want to strike the right balance between emphasizing domestic production, which gives our farmers security. [19:07] We don't want to be relying on a country like China, which shuts fertilizer exports on and off at will or have our producers here be subject to devastating subsidies from other countries. [19:18] But we want fair competition, whether it comes from import or made domestically. [19:22] We won't have as much security here. [19:24] We want to have a level playing field. [19:26] We want to make sure that our farmers have the inputs they need at a price that makes them competitive and makes them be able to maintain their farms. [19:32] It's so important to have food security. So I agree with you on these issues. [19:35] Well, if you want to increase supply, get mosaic to quit shut down plants that they have with their phosphate production. [19:44] Let's go to China. [19:45] They have placed unfair export restrictions on fertilizer products upsetting global markets for fertilizer. [19:54] What can you do to get the Chinese to remove these export restrictions in future trade negotiations with China? [20:01] Well, so so China, as I think we all know, you know, China's economic policies are closely tied to their political policies and they aren't they aren't a free market economy. [20:12] I don't think they will be anytime soon. And so they like to weaponize these types of things. [20:18] And sometimes they do it to control their own supply. Right. [20:22] I hear you talking about we want supply for our farmers. [20:25] They're desperately trying to be food secure themselves, which, again, I don't I don't countenance them in all their weaponization. [20:31] So we certainly can talk to them about it. We can raise it with them. [20:36] But remember that the Chinese, they have their own goals, which are not not the goals of capitalists or free marketeers. [20:42] They are goals to have their own supply chain. They want to control fertilizer for their own use. [20:48] They'll weaponize it at will. We'll work with them. We have a we have a working relationship with them. [20:53] We've been able to get concessions from them. So if it's important to all raise it with them. [20:57] But we should all be realistic about those possibilities. [21:00] USMCA has showed its value to the economies of all three countries because it's dramatically improved the economies of the countries and the increased trade that's happened. [21:12] All segments of the economy in all countries, but particularly for agriculture, it's been very good. [21:19] And so we have United States and Mexico failed to reach an agreement on Mexican tomato exports. [21:29] The Mexican government then launched an investigation into unfair trade practices of the U.S. pork industry ahead of further negotiations with Mexico this week. [21:41] What is the USTR doing to ensure Iowa pig farmers because we're number one in the production of pork? [21:48] So we don't get caught up in the crossfire trading retaliation. [21:54] Well, well, fortunately, Mexico has not retaliated against us. [21:59] I know they have an open investigation on on pork, and I have raised this repeatedly with my counterpart. [22:05] The Mexicans have been very pragmatic. They are quite dependent on our market for their for their growth and for their growth. [22:11] And for their employment. They know that we know that that's why we're able to proceed in a fairly non dramatic way with the Mexicans. [22:17] And they understand that if they take action on pork, the consequences for them could be quite challenging given their dependence on us. [22:25] So this is something that's important to me. It's something I've raised at the highest levels with the Mexican government. [22:30] And and trust me, we are monitoring this. And if we see any movement on this, we will work with you and we will we will do the necessary to maintain that open market. [22:40] We've been able to enjoy over the past several years. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Bennett. [22:45] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank you and the ranking member for having this committee. Ambassador Greer, thank you for coming back to the committee. [22:55] As everybody I hope knows, we are in a moment for real of real crisis for our family farmers and ranchers all over the country, including in Colorado. [23:08] You know, American Farm Bureau Federation projects substantial losses for major crops this year, including soybeans, corn and wheat, with many others far below their their break even point financial strain that is made worse by President Trump's trade policies. [23:29] And now, Ambassador Greer, after more than a century, we are on the verge of losing our position as the world's leading agricultural exporter. [23:39] I know you've talked about the need to resurrect American manufacturing through tariffs and other means, but American agriculture remains globally competitive. [23:50] This is not an industry that we're struggling to bring back. It has been a consistent source of American growth and American jobs for decades. American products can be found on grocery shelves all over the world. [24:03] But today, many producers are operating on the on thinner margins than ever before, in part because of the input costs that you were talking about. Next generation of farmers is struggling to start out or to take over family operations. [24:19] This is a crisis and that makes stable and reliable trade policy more important than ever. [24:26] Canada and Mexico, as you know, purchased nearly $60 billion in U.S. agricultural products each year. [24:33] There are two largest agricultural export markets and are among the most important markets for Colorado. [24:39] The USMCA provides the foundation for this trade. [24:44] At a time when our farmers are already stretched thin, we should be working to strengthen these trading relationships, not creating more doubt about access to our two most important markets. [24:55] So, Ambassador Greer, can you commit that American farmers will not lose market access in Canada or Mexico as a result of your approach to USMCA negotiations? [25:08] And how are you approaching the risk of retaliatory tariffs from Canada now that you've imposed 50 percent duties on a wide range of products that were previously exempt? [25:19] What economic effects do you anticipate you're creating for farmers and ranchers as a result of those tariffs? [25:28] So, Senator, for context, when President Trump left office's first term, we had an ag trade surplus. By the time Biden left, we had an ag trade deficit. [25:37] With respect, Mr. Besser, that is not an answer to my question, nor is it an answer to the crisis that our farmers and ranchers are facing. [25:43] The crisis came from President Biden. The fact that is irrelevant to the discussion. [25:48] We went into deficit under President Biden. [25:50] Mr. Chairman, may I ask my question, please? Or could he answer the question? [25:53] The surplus and the deficit is a result of the fact that you have made it more expensive for us to buy products from other places. [26:02] And it has absolutely nothing to do with the question I'm asking you, which is, are you going to use the negotiation with the USMCA to make sure that we are improving the position of our farmers and ranchers with our closest trading partners, [26:19] rather than continuing to undermine their position, which has been undermined from the very beginning of this administration till today? [26:30] That's the question. And a partisan discussion about Biden versus Trump, that's not what our farmers and ranchers are looking for. [26:37] And by the way, speaking of free market capitalism, I'll tell you what they're also not looking for. [26:42] They're not looking for another direct payment from this administration to try to make up for the screwed up trade policies that it's followed with respect to agriculture. [26:52] So I have asked you a respectful question with respect to the USMCA. Please answer that question. [26:59] One hundred percent. We're maintaining that market access because we have to dig out of this deficit in ag we were left with. [27:04] One hundred percent. We've expanded market access. We're keeping the market access in Canada and Mexico. [27:09] I talked with my Canadian counterpart yesterday. They did not say they're going to retaliate on what they're doing. [27:15] The Mexicans know that we need to keep market access there. The nature of all of our trade deals over the past year has been expanding market access for our farmers, [27:23] maintaining and expanding. That's what we've done. That's why we're back on the road to an ag surplus. [27:27] When you're when you're talking about, you know, the open market in North Macedonia, I'm sure you're proud of that. [27:33] The result the reality that we are now losing this our global leadership to Brazil as a result of the failed trade policy with respect to China. [27:46] And the punishment they have taken is a punishment against our farmers and ranchers in this country and American leadership when it comes to agriculture. [27:55] That's the that is the result of this trade policy. And I hope we do strengthen it with respect to the USMCA and that you'll reconsider the broader picture as well, [28:07] because this isn't just about that trade deficit. It's about what's happening on family farms all over the United States of America. [28:14] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse. Thanks very much. [28:20] Welcome Ambassador Greer. We've had conversations before about foreign companies gaining trade advantage by being allowed to pollute to lower pollution standards than we require at home. [28:41] And you have and your entire team has repeatedly said that, yeah, that kind of behavior is a proper occasion for a tariff adjustment. [28:54] Do you still believe that? I do believe that, yes. [28:57] Okay, good. The multiple United States administrations have had a problem with enforcing environmental requirements in our trade agreements. [29:17] I've condemned, I think, every administration since I've been here for crap enforcement, excuse my language, of environmental requirements. [29:28] I understand that you are trying to improve on that. Could you describe the improvements you are pursuing? [29:36] Thank you, Senator. And I'm grateful for your leadership on this issue where we have a lot of agreement. [29:43] One of the things we're doing as we're concluding these agreements on reciprocal trade is we are including requirements that that countries raise their environmental standards to at least meet the bare minimum so that we can have a level playing field. [29:57] So that's one thing we're doing more recently on Brazil. [30:01] We've had complaints for years, including from many members on this committee about Brazil, Brazil's deforestation practices, which actually give them unfair advantage over our farmers. [30:11] And so we've taken Section 301 action on deforestation on Brazil and we've taken a firm stance there. [30:17] So those are just a couple of things we're doing more. [30:20] Continue. Yes, sir. Continue to raise your game. [30:22] Our game from this country has really been on the floor always. [30:27] This is a rare area of agreement, I think bipartisan. [30:31] So keep going at it on the question of tariff refunds. [30:35] Rhode Island is a small business state. [30:38] I think everybody has conceded that Americans actually end up paying the cost of President Trump's tariffs, which is why there are refunds going back. [30:53] I have two concerns. [30:56] We've spoken about this before. [30:58] I have two concerns about the refund situation. [31:01] One, if you're a giant corporation and you have an enormous staff that is capable of being tasked to go and pursue tariff refunds through CBP. [31:14] Great. You can go back and get your refunds. [31:17] If you're a small business that got whacked by a tariff, it's not easy. [31:23] And if you are that huge business that went back and got your tariff refund, there's no obligation that you push it through to your customers who actually ended up paying it along the line. [31:38] It could end up just in corporate profits, CEO bonuses, and all of that. [31:43] Could you explain what you're doing to try to make sure that the tariff refund process is more open to small businesses, [31:49] and to make sure that the tariff refunds paid for by consumers initially aren't just pocketed by CEOs as bonuses? [31:57] Thank you, Senator. [31:59] So first of all, the Customs and Border Protection operates a website, a portal. [32:04] From what I understand, it has a relatively straightforward user interface. [32:10] If there was an importer of record, whether they were a foreign importer of record or a U.S. one, [32:16] if they were able to file with CBP to pay a tariff, they can use this new website to recuperate it. [32:25] So if there's a company that's able to pay a tariff, they're able to use this website to get it back. [32:31] And if you have specific constituents who have had a challenge with that, let me know. [32:36] We'll connect them with CBP because it should be like that. [32:39] Okay, good. I'll follow up. [32:40] On your other point, though, I don't concede that the tariffs went through to consumers. [32:45] A lot of them were eaten by foreign companies. [32:47] A lot of them were diluted in the supply chain. [32:50] And the reason why they're going back... [32:52] Sir, may I? [32:53] The reason why they're... [32:54] No, because you can't, because I'm the one who has the limited time here. [32:57] You're here all day. [32:58] I've got five minutes. [32:59] All right. You don't want an answer. [33:00] So that's why I want to jump back in. [33:02] If, in fact, it's not paid by the American side, it would make no sense to be making refunds. [33:07] So just your behavior with tariff refunds proves the point that it's not just paid by foreigners or foreign governments or China or whomever. [33:18] So let me make that point. [33:20] Last, let me just say that, you know, Americans are having a real cost problem. [33:25] And I think that some of that relates back to the tariff decisions. [33:29] Anybody who's got a small business or who's going to buy something that has a component that is manufactured in Canada that now has a 50 percent added cost associated with it, I think is going to have a real problem. [33:40] And I would urge you, and I think it's in your interest as an administration, try to help reduce the burden on American consumers by reducing the level of inordinate tariff assessments. [33:58] So good luck with that. [34:00] Thank you. Senator Cornyn. [34:03] Ambassador Greer, on July the 1st, the U.S. formally declined to renew the USMCA during the joint review. [34:14] Yet, as you know, the it remains in effect essentially with an annual review process. [34:20] But what are we to make of the administration's decision to declining to renew the USMCA? [34:27] So, Senator, when you look at July one, the options are you can rubber stamp the agreement and renew it without further revisions or you can enter into this period right where we decline to renew and and see if there are ways to improve the trading [34:46] relationship. And so you should look at it in the latter way. [34:51] President Trump already last year, some of the problems he sees in USMCA in outcomes, you know, exploding trade deficit with Mexico, not enough auto investment in the U.S. [35:02] Some of those problems he has already started to address with the Section 232 action on autos. [35:08] But there are a lot of things that we need to cover with Mexico, like rules of origin. [35:12] We want to make sure that any beneficiary in any any beneficial trade between our countries benefits our countries and not a third country like Vietnam or China. [35:20] So the administration wants to make the make it better. [35:24] We want to improve our trading relationships with Canada and Mexico. [35:28] There are there are there are some what I would call load bearing pillars in USMCA things we don't think about in terms of our ag market access, which we've talked about services acts a variety of things where we haven't seen issues. [35:40] But where we have seen issues, we're already in process of fixing it to make sure we can get more production here in the U.S. [35:45] As you know, the Mexico has consistently not lived up to its obligations under the 1944 Water Treaty with the United States. [35:56] I appreciate the work that Trump administration has done to bring them into compliance, at least on a temporary basis. [36:03] But because this is for a period of five years, the term of five years to comply with the requirements of the treaty. [36:11] It leaves our farmers basically high and dry, literally, when they don't comply on a regular basis. [36:19] Is there any way that the joint review process can reinforce those compliance and accountability? [36:25] For Mexico to help safeguard our farmers in South Texas? [36:30] Well, I guess what I would say, first of all, this is largely a State Department jurisdiction issue because of the treaty and USDA, you know, helps and we monitor it because people have expressed interest. [36:41] During during the review process, it is clear from President Trump's perspective that if we want to have a beneficial trading relationship with Mexico. [36:48] And and have some kind of arrangement with them. They also need to be playing ball on this issue. [36:55] Obviously, there are border security issues. There are a variety of issues that aren't right in my wheelhouse. [36:59] But the president is going to have a hard time agreeing to renewal or even revisions if Mexico isn't playing ball in all areas and the water treaty is one of them. [37:07] So one of the things that China has done over the years is created a dependency on it for things like rare earth element processing and now roughly 90% of the processing of rare earth occurs in China. [37:33] And I know there's been some efforts made to provide alternative sources, diversification of sources for the United States and other countries. [37:45] What is the status of current negotiations with China on the US access to process critical minerals and rare earths? [37:54] Well, Senator, they have committed and they've had a commitment since since last May to to expedite export control process, you know, processing export control applications for US companies, including those that are routed through third countries. [38:12] And so we are getting a flow of critical minerals from China. It's not as much as we would want. It's not at the pace we would want, but we are getting them. [38:21] We're getting the majority of what we need. We have regular meetings and calls with Chinese officials at all levels. [38:27] We, of course, maintain substantial leverage over them to make sure that they do this. [38:32] We have a variety of trade tools that we've used and have some are suspended, some are in effect that we can use to make sure that they comply. [38:40] So we're getting what we need. But most importantly, we are accelerating domestic production to try to get away from that dependency. [38:47] And I presume you would answer roughly the same when it came to the active ingredients and pharmaceuticals generic pharmaceuticals. [38:56] So at this point, there are controls on those active ingredients. So we haven't had an issue getting those. But with the dependency. Yes. In fact, you probably saw the president sent out a message last night about a trade policy wants to implement to accelerate the production of generic pharmaceuticals here in addition to the patented drugs that are also coming online here. [39:15] Thank you. Thank you, Senator Danes. Ambassador Greer. Welcome to the committee. Good to have you here. [39:23] Ambassador Greer. Welcome to the committee. Good to have you here. [39:26] Last November, there was a historic dinner at the White House. [39:29] You had all five Central Asian presidents and their corresponding foreign ministers. [39:34] On one side of the table, I was there with the president, the vice president, Secretary Besant, Secretary Rubio, as well as Ambassador Sergio Gore for historic moment. [39:47] They're in the White House as these great Central Asian countries now are developing a much closer relationship with the United States. And as you know, geopolitically, it's such an important part of the world in a very tough neighborhood surrounded by Russia, China, Afghanistan, Iran. [40:02] And as we have discussed. And by the way, one of the top issues they brought up that night at that dinner was a repeal of the antiquated Jackson Vanek provision. [40:12] It is an embarrassment. The United States maintains these trade restrictions associated with Jackson Vanek on Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and now Azerbaijan. [40:22] As of late last year, Azerbaijan is now officially part of we call the C six. What used to be the C five is now Azerbaijan. We're pulling that group together as they work with the United States. [40:34] This Jackson Vanek restriction is an ancient relic of Soviet Union days. It long ago ceased serving any useful purpose. It's become a barrier to deepening America's relationship with this most strategic world. [40:40] And again, it was the issue they did bring up with President Trump when we had dinner in November. Ambassador Greer. I know you've been engaged in that part of the world. Very important. [40:47] Would you support the efforts to repeal these antiquated trade restrictions? [40:52] Well, Senator Greer, thank you for the time that we have been engaged in the world. [40:57] The United States has been a relic of Soviet Union days. It long ago ceased serving any useful purpose. It's become a barrier to deepening America's relationship with this most strategic region. [41:04] And again, it was the issue they did bring up with President Trump when we had dinner in November. [41:10] Senator, thank you for your leadership on this issue. And I've spent time in this area. [41:14] And if this is something that's important to Congress, you know, my sense is that we'll be will be supportive. [41:19] I mean, we're very focused on establishing reciprocal trade with countries. [41:23] Uzbekistan has offered to open its market to us and they've given us a very, very substantial market access offer to reduce tariffs on us during my trip that was there a couple of weeks ago. [41:33] I think if if this process goes along with these countries agreeing to open their markets to us, then that's a that's a complimentary effort that we could support. [41:41] Yeah. And this is tied to some some Jewish immigration issues from the Soviet Union days. [41:47] The embarrassing part of this is that there's three countries to remain after we get this bill through. [41:53] And by the way, Chris Murphy is my Democrat co sponsor on this. It's bipartisan, but the remaining countries would be Cuba, Belarus and North Korea. [42:04] And this is the embarrassing part of the Jack's advantage provisions. We have these countries are working closely with us now in Central Asian and South Caucasus. [42:14] And yet they're in the same list as North Korea, Cuba and Belarus. So we hope we can get this done before the end of the year. And I appreciate your support on that. I know Secretary Rubio supports this in the administration as well. [42:27] You recently traveled to Central Asia and conducted negotiations with some of our friends in that region. [42:32] Could you talk a little bit about the progress that your team has made in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan? [42:38] Yes. And I'll talk about Uzbekistan first because I've I've interacted with that country the most. [42:46] I just got back from a visit there. I met with their president and his staff. These are serious people who are changing their economy. [42:53] It's much more Western oriented. You land in Tashkent. And when you see the central square, they have a you know, they have a giant they have a giant Coke bottle. [43:03] They have got a mock up of the love statue from Philadelphia. This is a country that wants to be Western oriented, not just in that kind of thing, but especially in economics. [43:12] And so, like I mentioned, they have offered to open their market to us. [43:16] They've given us a very robust market access offer to reduce tariffs on a number of things that are important to us. [43:21] This is a country of 40 million people, which I think sometimes people forget or don't realize. [43:26] So it's a real market. They're hungry for American goods. So it's a real opportunity. [43:31] Kazakhstan in the area is an interesting partner, especially because they have a lot of the critical minerals that we seek. [43:39] As you mentioned, it's a rough neighborhood. So I don't think we want to shift dependency from one place to Kazakhstan, [43:45] but we do want to diversify. And so various parts of the administration have been working with Kazakhstan to explore critical mineral opportunities in that country. [43:53] Yeah, you know, they share the largest border with Russia of any country to their north and of course, China to their east and Iran to the south in terms of overall in Central Asia. [44:03] So thank you for your work in that area. I do believe as Zbigniew Brzezinski once said, who was Jimmy Carter's national security advisor and was offered to be the advisor for Ronald Reagan. [44:12] He said that Central Asia is the wine bottle of the South Caucus of the Cork and the great work the president has done, [44:18] brokering the peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, stopping a 34 year hot war just opened that opportunity up for us. [44:25] Last, I wanted to talk briefly on palladium. There's three chief producers of palladium in the world. [44:30] It's Russia, South Africa and Montana. The Russians are dumping palladium below prices here in the United States, [44:38] caused 700 workers in Montana to lose their jobs at that mine. [44:41] They're under the assault of Russian market manipulation to knock them out of business. [44:46] This brazen assault on U.S. national security and hardworking Montana miners can't be allowed to stand. [44:51] Ambassador Greer, would you support taking corrective action to end Russia's market manipulation [44:57] and ensuring we get Montana miners back on the job to supply this critical mineral, [45:03] made in Montana mineral, no less, and support this industry? [45:07] I am supportive. Anywhere where there's a distorted market, we want to get those fixed. [45:11] We want to make sure that our miners have a level playing field, especially for a critical mineral like palladium. [45:16] Ambassador Greer, thank you. [45:19] Senator Warren. [45:20] Thank you, Mr Chairman. So Donald Trump campaigned for office going out every day, promising that he would lower costs [45:28] for American families on day one. [45:32] Then he takes office and he slaps tariffs on and off and on and off nearly every product that we import. [45:42] Americans are now paying for it. Based on an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office and the Treasury Department's own [45:49] numbers. Trump's tariffs are costing cost families an average of $1,700. [45:56] And that was before his illegal war in Iran pushed prices even higher. [46:01] So ambassador Greer over a year ago, you sat in this very room and my Democratic colleagues and I asked you [46:08] about Trump's chaotic across the board tariffs and said they will drive up prices and said they will drive up prices. [46:17] And you said, no, no, we can have tariffs and lower prices. Well, now we have the receipts. So let's just clear this one up. [46:23] Ambassador Greer, have Trump's tariffs increased prices for American families? [46:31] Senator, no, core inflation fell to 2.6 percent year on year, much better than in January 2025. [46:36] So you're saying that what the Congressional Budget Office and the Treasury Department's own numbers [46:42] that families are paying an average of $1,700 more. Are you saying your own Treasury Department and your own Congressional Budget Office just don't know what they're talking about? [46:55] Well, I'm interested in seeing what Treasury numbers you're talking about. No one's given them to me to look at, so I want to verify those. [47:00] Actually, they've been out there in public now for at least the last six months. They've been widely distributed because families are paying more. And there's no serious economist around the country. [47:10] There's no serious person who looks at those numbers and thinks that families are doing better. [47:16] Trump's tariffs mean that families have paid, on average, $1,700 last year. And now the United States Supreme Court has said that those tariffs were illegal [47:29] and that the Trump administration has to give people their money back. So, so far, the administration has been slow walking. [47:37] Ambassador Greer, are American consumers going to get any refunds on the tariffs that were illegally collected from them? [47:45] So, Senator, when the court ruled on this, they did exactly what the Democratic attorney generals who sued asked to do, which was to give money back to the companies, foreign and domestic, that paid the tariffs. [47:57] That's what, that's what Democratic attorney generals asked to do. They didn't say give it to consumers. [48:01] So that's how I understand. [48:02] They said give it to companies. So that's what we have to do. [48:04] I understand that's how they got standing. But the question I'm asking the administration, are you going to get money back to the American people who paid more? [48:15] What the data show is the American people picked up about 95% of the cost of those Trump tariffs. They paid an average of $1,700. [48:25] And I just want to know if you even have the slightest effort making even the slightest effort to try to get some of that money back into the pockets of American families. [48:36] Or does that just not matter to the Trump administration? [48:39] So, so what happened is the foreign and domestic importers, right, who are buying foreign goods, not goods from American workers, foreign goods made by foreign workers who had to pay a fee on those foreign goods, those foreign importers records, domestic importers records, they can file. [48:56] They had to pay the tariff. They can get the tariff back. Manufacturing workers wages have gone up $2,600 way beyond what the Biden budget lab at Yale has calculated. [49:04] No, actually they haven't. What we know is that thousands of factory workers have lost their jobs. That means their incomes have gone to zero. [49:11] But I take it what you're saying. I think I've got your answer here. And that is the Trump administration just doesn't care, isn't even lifting a finger to try to get one nickel of the money that was collected from consumers back into the pockets of the consumers. [49:26] And that certainly is where they are right now. Instead, what you've been doing is searching for other ways to see if you can take money out of the pockets of consumers with tariffs. [49:38] And just this week, you slapped on new tariffs using an obscure law from the 1930s, plus using something called Section 301. But here's my question. Ambassador Greer, if the Supreme Court strikes down your next round of tariffs, [49:44] do you have a plan in place for how to return the money that American consumers pay under those tariffs, how to return that money directly to the families who pay? [50:04] You can do this now. Put a plan in place. Do you have a plan in place? [50:11] Customs currently has a website to return any any tariffs to the foreign importers records or domestic importers who paid them and they'll continue to do that. [50:20] I'm asking about American families, the people you're supposed to be working for. [50:24] Do you have any plan if this next round of tariffs are struck down for how you're going to get the money that is collected from American consumers back into their pockets? [50:33] The normal way that customs law worked is that the importer of record, if they pay a tariff, it's overruled, they give it back. [50:39] There's never been a no. Look, I believe that tariffs can be used strategically quite valuably. [50:45] But what the Trump administration is doing is picking the pockets of American consumers. [50:50] And after Donald Trump promised he would lower costs on day one, he puts in place tariffs that have done nothing but raise prices for consumers. [50:59] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator Smith. [51:02] Senator Smith. [51:04] Thank you, Mr. Chair and ranking member and good morning, Ambassador Greer. [51:09] So, Ambassador Greer, I am like firmly in the camp that, as you and I have discussed, that our trade policy should support good jobs in domestic manufacturing and that those trade policies should have strong labor and environmental standards. [51:24] I appreciate what Senator Whitehouse was saying earlier and that for too long our trade policy is tilted too much towards making it easier for big corporations to send job overseas. [51:34] And this is not in my mind a Democratic or Republican issue. I've criticized Democratic administrations as well as Republican ones for not getting this right. [51:42] So with that in mind, I have two questions that I want to try to get to with you today. One is around taconite and the other one is around sugar. [51:51] And I'm going to start with taconite. So as you know, Minnesota produces nearly all of the raw taconite or iron ore pellets that goes into U.S. steel production. [52:00] And, you know, that industry has struggled from time to time, as I'm sure you also know. A couple of months after the president took office, we saw layoffs, layoffs at Hibbing Taconite and also at the Menorca mine, maybe about 600 total jobs gone because of what's been happening. [52:19] So we have an opportunity to make this right here for the workers in those mines and for those pellet plants on the Iron Range. [52:27] And I think that we ought to be able to find some agreement on this. I'd like to work with you on this. So here's the opportunity, right? [52:33] For years we've done the right thing and we have levied tariffs on illegally dumped and subsidized steel coming into the countries coming into the United States from countries like China. [52:44] But we haven't always done the right thing for taconite pellets that feed those steel mills. And so the United States finds itself currently importing ores from foreign sources at the same time [52:57] that these mines in Minnesota are idle. So my question is, do you think Ambassador Greer, is there a way that we could think about this situation and get at this? [53:06] And what are the opportunities to use our trade tools to support domestic taconite from the illegal and I think unfair trade practices that are hurting Minnesota's Iron Range? [53:16] So yes, and I appreciate your leadership on this issue. This is something where we can and should work together. I have spoken with some of these companies that are operating and want to operate in northern Minnesota. [53:28] I think there are trade tools we can use because we so we are so import dependent right now on some of these inputs. [53:35] I think I think if we face something in in a short period of time to signal to the market, domestic taconite is where it's at and where it's going to be. [53:44] Right. And so we can wait wean ourselves off over time. Right. I would really like to work with you on that because I think it's I think it is an opportunity in the ebbs and flows in the cycling of the taconite industry of, you know, are a big burden. [53:56] And there's I mean, I think we can be honest. There's no doubt that the way that the tariff regime has affected other manufacturing sectors in the United States, you might argue in the short run. [54:06] I would maybe now argue differently has had an impact on demand for domestic steel as well. And so I think there's an opportunity here. Let me see if I can get to the sugar question as well. [54:17] You know about this as well. You and I have talked about this. Minnesota is one of the number one sugar beet producing states in the nation supporting overseas. [54:25] supporting over 20,000 jobs and a $3 billion economic impact just in Minnesota. And it's struggling right now. And as you no doubt know, we have a situation where there is a glut of global supply and from subsidized sugar that that sugar can be sold into the United States with the tariff, you know, after tariff quota. [54:48] And it's still sold into the United States at lower than the cost of goods sold for domestic sugar producers. [54:55] And this is causing a lot of struggle in my northern northwestern part of the state where producers are trying to figure out, do I sell my shares in the co op or do I plant beets that I know I'm going to lose money on? [55:11] You know, for the time being. So can you address this ambassador? And as you know, we sold excuse me, Senator Hoven and Senator Slotkin and believe Chair Crapo signed this letter as well. [55:23] Raise this with you and Secretary Rollins about the opportunities to open a section 301 investigation into this. [55:31] Yes, Senator. Again, this is an area where I think we can work together. I have conferred with with the chairman, even the ranking member on these issues on sugar. So we are working very closely with the domestic industry right now to try to assess, you know, their view of the unfair trading practices that might persist overseas. That's the legal basis for any section 301. So we're committed to working with them. We're gathering a lot of information from them right now because we want to see action too. [55:57] That's great. And I think, you know, timing is of the essence. We'll look forward to getting a more full report on the on your plans there and look forward to working with my colleagues on that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Cortez Mastel. [56:09] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ambassador, it's good to see you. Thank you for being here. I want to talk a little bit about the aerospace and aviation industries. As you well know, they're critical to our country and supporting both our national fence and our tourism and economy. [56:25] I am hearing concerns from many in this industry that the Section 232 investigation into imports of aircraft and aircraft parts is chilling investment and threatening some aerospace jobs. [56:40] The administration hasn't yet shown the public any results of these investigations. Do you intend to release these investigations? [56:49] So thank you, Senator. This is a critical supply chain where we're quite focused. The investigation you're talking about is a Section 232 investigation under commerce. [56:58] I'll tell you what I know about it and refer you to commerce, of course. About, I think, 10 days ago, the president signed an action in this investigation saying, listen, this is critical. We are worried about imports. [57:11] We are worried about imports. However, we would much rather negotiate with countries potential landing zones on this because it is so sensitive. [57:19] Can I ask you a question? Because I recognize this in commerce's role, but you're actually negotiating these trade agreements based on these reports, correct? [57:27] We work with the Commerce Department to get their input. So like any negotiation. [57:32] So these reports would be critical to your negotiations with trade, correct? Yes. [57:36] Yes. So at some point in time, these reports are required under the law. [57:40] They exist, yes. To be public. And so I guess that's my question. As you're, I'm assuming your access to this information is the result of an investigation that has been completed because you need it for trade negotiation. [57:54] So once it's completed, it should be available to the American public. And that's my question. [58:00] It may not be within your department, but I would hope that you would convince them that they should at least follow the law and release these reports of the American public. [58:08] And quite honestly, Congress has the results of these as well. [58:11] I'll, I'll raise it with the Commerce Secretary. [58:13] I appreciate that. [58:15] Let me ask you some about something that we have talked about quite often. [58:19] And this is tourism. [58:21] We talk a lot about trade deficit in goods, which I so appreciate. [58:26] But last year for the first time in decades, the U.S. experienced a trade deficit in our largest service export, and that's tourism. [58:35] And after running a trade surplus and travel in 2024, we actually experienced a $14 billion trade deficit in 2025. [58:44] I've seen that in my home state of Las Vegas. [58:47] We have seen that across the country, quite honestly. [58:51] With your focus on the trade balance, what is your analysis of why this sharp drop in tourism has happened? [58:59] Have you looked at this at all? [59:00] You've talked to us about this before. [59:03] So it's something that, that we, that we think about, and it falls into that bucket of services. [59:07] And, you know, in the overall category of services, we've never exported more services before. [59:12] But I know for you in Las Vegas particularly, this is an issue. [59:17] You know, we're hopeful that with, you know, the World Cup, we saw an uptick in the past couple of months. [59:23] We think we've seen a lot of, when I've asked even domestic industry about it, airlines, credit card folks who are, you know, doing this, they've seen a lot of internal and domestic. [59:33] So whether it's imports of, of, of tourism or domestic tourism, I think my goal is just make sure that places like Las Vegas are up and running. [59:42] I'm happy to work with you more on this to identify things we can do. [59:45] We can work with the Commerce Department on tourism promotion. [59:47] They have their own bureau to deal with it. [59:49] So I appreciate that. [59:50] Senator Moran and I have introduced legislation to include a travel and tourism working group in the US MCA. [59:56] Would you commit to supporting that? [1:00:00] I will. [1:00:01] Yes. [1:00:02] A hundred percent. [1:00:03] Yes. [1:00:04] Thank you. [1:00:05] I appreciate that. [1:00:06] Let me talk a little bit about critical minerals. [1:00:08] And I'm curious, you and I would both agree, critical minerals and critical mineral supply chain is important for this country, right? [1:00:16] And so it's an area that I've worked in quite often and talked to you about, and I appreciate your comments. [1:00:23] Let me ask you this and just if you can provide some information. [1:00:27] Indonesia has long been a had a ban on the export of raw critical minerals such as nickel ore, which has resulted in massive Chinese investment in nickel refining in Indonesia. [1:00:39] Last July, the White House released a joint statement with Indonesia regarding trade negotiations that said, quote, Indonesia will remove restrictions on exports to the United States of industrial commodities, including critical minerals. [1:00:51] However, shortly after that release in that statement, multiple Indonesian officials, including their Minister of Economic Affairs, disputed that Indonesia would open its exports of raw minerals to the US. [1:01:05] Again, there was another signing a trade agreement in February. [1:01:08] The White House made that statement and then Indonesia again said, no, that is not going to happen. [1:01:12] So can you let us know is Indonesia are they agreeing to change its laws and regulations so that it will export raw ore to the US? [1:01:21] Where are we and what is the status of that? [1:01:23] Thank you. This is really important to us, too. And we want to hold Indonesia's feet to the fire on this as well. [1:01:29] What they have, like many countries, they have an export control regime and they've committed to us to expedite that for us. [1:01:35] You can imagine they don't want to be in a situation where everything they produce has to go to one country in the area. [1:01:41] So they're trying to balance geopolitically what they're doing. They're working with us. [1:01:46] We had a complaint once about some minerals not being able to be exported. [1:01:51] We called the Indonesians. They took care of it right away. We have a good working relationship with them. [1:01:54] So we just have to keep their feet to the fire to have them live up to these agreements. [1:01:58] Thank you. I know my time is up, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Welch. [1:02:07] Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [1:02:17] Ambassador Greer, first of all, I want to say that your office has been responsive when we've had questions and I quite appreciate that. [1:02:25] But what I do want to take this opportunity to do is explain to you whatever the intent of the tariffs are, it's really causing a lot of harm so far in Vermont, [1:02:36] both the tariffs and the way in which they are variable in changing quite a bit. [1:02:43] And I want to take the opportunity to tell you because I know you're concerned about the well being of small businesses. [1:02:48] I know you're concerned about the well being of everyday consumers, but the tariffs are are really, really, uh, [1:02:55] uh, troublesome in Vermont. Number one, our tourism is down about 40%. [1:03:02] A lot of that has to do with the rhetoric that the president has used, and I don't hold you responsible for that. [1:03:10] But the 51st state, the governor of Canada, that rhetoric has really inhibited Canadians from coming down. [1:03:18] Steve Wright, who's the head of Jay Peak, a really prominent speak in a much more courteous way towards our Canadian neighbors. [1:03:25] That's going to help us in Vermont. The other the other thing we're hearing about who I'm hearing about, [1:03:31] uh, you know, Canada is Vermont's number one trade customers, $631 million worth of goods annually, 3600 jobs in Vermont. [1:03:43] And as a result of the tariffs, let me just give you some examples and I appreciate you listening, [1:03:48] but I really want Vermont to be heard is the concrete outcomes of what's happening in the way it's being done. [1:03:55] Rovers North is a small business in Westford, Vermont. [1:03:59] Uh, they rehab wrote, uh, Land Rovers. [1:04:03] Uh, for the first time in 50 years, they had to have layoffs. [1:04:06] Uh, Orvis, which is a world renowned, uh, sports, uh, equipment fishing, uh, company. [1:04:16] Uh, it's been forced to close over half its stores and has gone through multiple rounds of layoffs. [1:04:21] Very heartbreaking for us in Vermont. [1:04:24] Uh, Jasper Hill Farms is an international award winning cheese maker. [1:04:29] It was started by two young brothers, uh, in Vermont. [1:04:32] Uh, in Vermont has now achieved distinction worldwide. [1:04:37] Uh, in Hills Farmstead brewery, which is also, uh, started by a sixth generation, uh, uh, young man, uh, in, in, uh, in Greensboro, Vermont. [1:04:48] Uh, both of those have seen their overhead and equipment costs double in price. [1:04:53] They're losing business daily to Canadians because they don't come down, uh, for their visits to their, to their companies. [1:05:01] Uh, you know, when the global liberation tariffs were first announced in April, pardon me, of 25, uh, [1:05:11] President Trump excluded more than a thousand products. [1:05:14] Uh, without providing any rationale for why those specific products were listed. [1:05:19] And those exemptions were made in it appears it was made because whoever was on the receiving end had the ability to contact somebody in the White House to get an exemption. [1:05:32] Our Vermonters don't have that telephone number. Uh, so we're just getting hit with these tariffs and it looks like to some extent, if you have access to the administration, you may get an end around and avoid them, which is really troubling to us in Vermont. [1:05:47] Uh, the, we are having trouble getting the refunds. I heard the exchange and I know that you have to follow the law. I heard you explain that. [1:05:54] But just going through that has been really tough for us. [1:05:58] Uh, so this is, I just want you to understand how tough this has been in Vermont. [1:06:03] We really value our relationship with Canada, both emotionally and financially and economically. [1:06:09] Uh, in, in the, uh, the way the tariffs have changed constantly and recently just, I think two days ago, the president has announced new tariffs that may go into effect. [1:06:23] They do people just don't know what to count on and it's hurting us badly. [1:06:27] So I guess I'll end by just asking if you can give me some assurance that there'll be more clarity and certainty, uh, uh, to the tariff policy. [1:06:40] And frankly, a respectful engagement, even if negotiations are tough, but where we're treating Canadians as the longtime friends of Vermont that they've been. [1:06:50] Uh, thank you for listening, uh, Mr. Ambassador. [1:06:53] Uh, just briefly, cause it's out of time. [1:06:57] Canada has benefited from the best trade agreement, even under the, uh, trade treatment, even under the president's trade policy since last April. [1:07:05] The vast majority of what they're sending to us has come in preferentially. [1:07:09] It has remained that way. It's been consistent that way. [1:07:12] Even now with the tailored, um, actions we took this week, we're fighting against a ban on American liquor on shelves. [1:07:21] We're fighting against hard caps on export American cars. [1:07:25] So we've never banned Canadian products. Uh, we've never done that kind of thing, but we're fighting against caps on American cheese. [1:07:32] I think about your, your, your cheese producers, they should be exporting more to Canada. [1:07:35] Can's refuse this. So we're trying to balance this relationship, have as much trade, uh, you know, liberal trade in North America as possible while protecting our producers. [1:07:46] Uh, it's not going to happen overnight. Uh, we didn't get into this problem overnight, won't be fixed overnight, but I want to work with you. [1:07:52] You list off a lot of companies. I'm happy to meet with them personally, uh, and talk to them. [1:07:56] Uh, you know, sometimes it's tariff, sometimes there are other things going on. [1:07:59] But if there are things we can do to try to smooth this process for them, I want to work with you. [1:08:04] Okay. Thank you. [1:08:05] Thank you, Senator Warren. Senator Barrasso. [1:08:07] Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Great to see you again. Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. [1:08:11] I want to talk about soda ash exports. [1:08:13] As you know, Wyoming's Green River Basin is home of the world's largest deposits of naturally occurring trona. [1:08:19] It's the mineral that's refined into soda ash. Uh, Wyoming's top export supports thousands of jobs across the state. [1:08:26] And the industry is facing a serious challenge. That's because earlier this year, producers in India petitioned their government to restrict imports of American soda ash. [1:08:36] Uh, the result can be a hard limit on how much American soda ash can enter their market, regardless of the price, regardless of the demand. [1:08:43] And our soda ash producers can compete with anyone in the world on a level playing field. [1:08:48] What we're worrying that was what's happening in India, uh, make sure that we don't get the level playing field. [1:08:53] So I was going to ask how you're working to ensure fair market access for American producers like soda ash in India. [1:08:59] Uh, thank you, Senator. And for and for raising this issue, uh, which we we've heard about from your staff. [1:09:05] Um, so I, uh, uh, I have a good relationship with my counterpart in India and we work closely with their trade ministry. [1:09:12] I will raise this with them next time. Uh, you know, they have internal processes on trade remedies like like we do. [1:09:18] Um, but we want to make sure that any process they have is fair, uh, that our producers are being traded fairly and they get to the right answer. [1:09:25] So we'll, we will, we'll advocate with them, uh, for your soda ash producers. [1:09:29] Thank you. I wanted to then switch to, to beef Wyoming beef. [1:09:32] Uh, our ranchers produce the highest quality beef in the world. [1:09:35] Uh, beef is Wyoming's top agriculture export, nearly 150 million shipped around the world each year. [1:09:41] Uh, for far too long, our ranchers faced barriers that kept them out of foreign markets, uh, that they have every right to compete in. [1:09:49] Uh, through the administration's trade agenda, we're seeing some real change, but we believe there's more work to be done. [1:09:54] There's still too many markets are able to hide behind unscientific and discriminatory restrictions that put our ranchers at a disadvantage. [1:10:02] So as you continue to negotiating new trade agreements, what more can be done to open markets for American beef and ensure that Wyoming ranchers, uh, can compete on equal footing? [1:10:12] Uh, thank you. And to, to your point, we finally got Australia to open up to American beef after 20 years of closure. [1:10:19] Uh, we have a bunch of, uh, we have Argentina and, and other, um, South American and Central American countries that have, uh, facilitated this. [1:10:28] We've, we have gotten China now to agree to re-register beef production facilities. [1:10:32] That, that's an area where, or beef import facilities. [1:10:36] That's an area where we want to keep focusing, uh, because I know a lot of the cuts that Americans don't eat will go to China. [1:10:41] And so, uh, we had a call this week at the staff level. [1:10:45] I'll have a call next week at my level and we'll raise this to make sure that, uh, American beef producers can send some of those, uh, cuts they prefer over there. [1:10:53] Thank you. And, you know, I appreciate your doing the job you're doing in terms of highlighting American manufacturing job gains and wage growth. [1:11:01] Uh, you did it in your testimony today, so congratulations on the success there. [1:11:04] You know, in Wyoming, chemical manufacturing is driving much of our progress. [1:11:08] Uh, Wyoming sends over a billion dollars in chemical products across the world each year. [1:11:12] Our producers are positioned to reach even more markets. [1:11:15] So trade deals like the U.S.-Mexico-Canadian agreement have included commitments to reduce barriers in specific industries like chemical manufacturing. [1:11:24] Progress, uh, has been limited. [1:11:26] So how are you pushing trading partners to follow through on industry-specific commitments and open their markets to our manufacturers across the board? [1:11:35] Uh, so, Senator, there, there are really two ways we approach this when we negotiate. [1:11:39] On the one hand, you have the tariff barriers where we ask them to remove tariffs, particularly on chemicals. [1:11:44] So that's why we have the European Union, despite hundreds of years of working with these countries, [1:11:49] finally we have an agreement and they've actually lowered, you know, as of a few weeks ago, [1:11:52] all of their tariffs on all industrial goods, uh, including chemicals. [1:11:56] And then there are non-tariff barriers. [1:11:58] For each country, we give them a list of specific things, maybe the regulatory things, maybe their certifications, [1:12:03] and we ask them to resolve, to simplify, uh, to allow them to do this. [1:12:07] And that's how we approach it. [1:12:08] Great. [1:12:09] Let me finish with this question on the Wyoming sheep industry. [1:12:11] The sheep industry has been part of our ranching heritage for longer than we've actually been a state. [1:12:16] And, uh, earlier this year I raised concerns with your office about surging lamb imports [1:12:20] and the strains that they're putting on Wyoming sheep industry. [1:12:23] Family-owned operations that have sustained rural communities in Wyoming for generations are now fighting to survive. [1:12:29] So I want to thank you for directing the International Trade Commission to investigate [1:12:34] whether these imports are harming our domestic industry, uh, [1:12:37] and our producers deserve, I believe, a fair chance to compete, uh, in their own market. [1:12:42] So can you speak to how this investigation is expected to unfold and what you expect going forward? [1:12:46] Uh, it's a safeguard investigation. [1:12:48] I was not in Wyoming, but I was in Utah last, uh, last week, [1:12:51] and I met with farmers who, who literally were crying tears of joy that this had been initiated. [1:12:56] So thank you for your advocacy. [1:12:59] Uh, the ITC in coming months will initiate, uh, this investigation. [1:13:02] They will ask the domestic industry and the importers for information [1:13:05] so they can determine, was there a surge in imports? [1:13:08] Uh, is there serious injury to the domestic industry? [1:13:11] If so, they can make a recommendation, uh, back to our office and to the president. [1:13:14] So we'll see how that investigation turns out and take action if appropriate. [1:13:18] Thanks so very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:13:20] Thank you. [1:13:21] Senator Warnock. [1:13:22] Thank you, Chair Crapo. [1:13:24] Donald Trump promised, quote, on day one, we will end inflation and make America affordable again. [1:13:32] Instead, he's made life more expensive for everybody. [1:13:37] That's even before his illegal war of choice sent energy prices through the roof. [1:13:45] According to the Tax Foundation, Trump's tariffs cost households $1,000 last year [1:13:53] and will cost them another $1,300 this year. [1:13:56] The New York Fed found that in 2025, 90% of the economic burden from the tariffs were ultimately paid by American consumers and businesses. [1:14:07] And a separate Fed study concluded what Americans already know just by going to the grocery store. [1:14:14] The tariffs raised prices for families and contributed to core inflation. [1:14:20] Welcome, Ambassador Greer. [1:14:23] Despite this mountain of evidence, you and the president still seem to be in denial that tariffs have raised prices. [1:14:30] A fact that study after study confirms and it's just basic common sense. [1:14:35] Everybody sees it. We're feeling it. So here's my question. Has the USTR ever produced [1:14:42] any rigorous peer evaluated study refuting the fact that the president's tariffs have contributed to inflation? [1:14:49] Or is your rebuttal to these conclusions just based on vibes, people's feelings, politics? [1:14:55] So, no, we don't do vibes, Senator. So the Council on Economic Advisors, they've done analyses. [1:15:04] We have seen, in fact, in the last month, inflation dropped by 0.4 percent, core goods to 2.6 percent. [1:15:12] Quite a contrast under Biden time with 9 percent inflation. Eggs have gone down by 28 percent year on year. [1:15:17] My question. [1:15:18] Do you want the data, sir? [1:15:19] Well, I want. Yeah, I want to. [1:15:20] I'll give it to you. [1:15:21] I want an answer to my actual question. [1:15:22] Well, I have data. I'm trying to give it to you. [1:15:24] My question is, have you ever produced a peer evaluated study refuting this evidence? [1:15:31] I literally have the data I'm prepared to read to you from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, [1:15:37] which has serious economists year on year. The price of eggs has gone down 28 percent. [1:15:42] Smartphones have gone down 12 percent. Butter has gone down 8.7. [1:15:45] That's not my question. That's not my question. [1:15:48] I thought you want to know about the prices. They're down. [1:15:50] That's not my question. The point is, is that tariffs contributed to inflation. [1:15:54] Prices are higher than they were when the president came into office and tariffs made it worse. [1:16:01] That people all over Georgia know that businesses know that. [1:16:06] And I'm asking you, I guess. I guess the answer to that is no. [1:16:09] There's no peer evaluated rigorous study refuting this. [1:16:14] Giving me item by item what the price of eggs is. [1:16:17] Does it take seriously the situation? [1:16:20] That's what Americans Americans are. That's what Americans care about. [1:16:23] They care about these prices and they're down. [1:16:25] So how about this with within 60 days will the USTA are since since you seem convinced that this is working and and that tariffs have not driven up inflation. [1:16:36] Can you produce a formal rigorous study say within the next 60 days that disproves what all Americans and economists believe to be true about the clear link between these tariffs and price increases? [1:16:47] Can you produce that, sir? We have substantial data will provide for you. [1:16:50] I'm happy to sit with you and talk about this because I don't think a five minute call like we does it justice. [1:16:55] I'm happy to come and talk to you. Everything in the grocery cart comes from America produced here or Canada Mexico duty free. So that's so. [1:17:02] So let's move on to one of the president's claims. He implemented these tariffs to create what he promised would be a quote manufacturing boom. [1:17:10] Meanwhile, we've lost at least seventy five thousand manufacturing jobs since this president has taken office. [1:17:18] How many net manufacturing jobs should we expect to see created by the end of this term because of these tariffs? [1:17:24] Keep in mind that we're already at a net negative of seventy five thousand. [1:17:28] So in terms of data. So this year in two thousand six, we've had an average increase per month of three thousand manufacturing jobs in twenty twenty four. [1:17:38] Last year of Biden, there was a negative fifteen thousand jobs on average per month loss. [1:17:42] So we're already we've righted the ship on this and now we're in positive territory, which is where we want to be. [1:17:46] How much of that construction is due to data centers? You want to talk about construction now. OK, so factory construction has gone up. [1:17:54] The employment in factory construction has has gone up to eighty three thousand, which is a huge benefit for our construction. [1:18:00] A lot of this factory, some is for computing, some is for data, things that that can. [1:18:05] So so where do you expect to be at a net positive by twenty thirty? [1:18:11] Because right now we're by twenty thirty. Yeah, right now we're. [1:18:15] Yes, yes, because after covid manufacturing jobs went back up as one would expect when the economy opened back up and then it plummeted by two twenty thousand two hundred twenty thousand jobs under Biden. [1:18:25] We stabilized it last year. Now we're net positive again. So I expect that trend to continue if these policies. [1:18:30] So we we're out of time for the chair. Let me just say why why this is important. [1:18:34] I'm talking to business leaders all across Georgia talking to consumers. [1:18:40] One example is is a company where they've had to lay off folks because they need a special type of steel that we don't make. [1:18:48] And that steel is now subject to a fifty percent tariff. I could go on and on. I'm all for manufacturing jobs. [1:18:54] But these tariffs are raising costs and everybody seems to know that except the Trump administration. [1:19:00] Thank you. Thank you, Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:19:04] Thank you, sir, for being here with us today. We appreciate it. And as you well know, Tennessee's got a great economy. [1:19:11] It is vibrant and booming and we've got so many companies that are looking to relocate their businesses in our state because we're one of the best led and lowest tax states in the country. [1:19:26] And I'm hearing from them every day. They're excited to be in Tennessee, but they almost always tell me they're nervous about the uncertainty of the tariff landscape. [1:19:38] And you're in your team have always been responsive to us and you've engaged with us. And I thank you for that. [1:19:48] Tennesseans agree with you and President Trump that we have to own sure manufacturing and establish fair and reciprocal trade around the globe. [1:19:59] But the whipsaw effect has made it difficult for some of our businesses to maintain their growth plans or to make big capital. [1:20:08] investments. I'm going to touch on some of the things I'm hearing back home. I won't ask you to reply here in person, but I will submit these for QF ours. [1:20:19] I'd like to start with distilled spirits. We make good whiskey in Tennessee. It's a popular product around the world. [1:20:27] But especially in Canada. And we're so frustrated by the actions that Canadians took to pull us distilled spirits from the shelves and are paying close attention to the recent announcement on Canadian tariffs. [1:20:42] And the question that I've got for you is now that pressure has been applied. What will come next? What do you anticipate to be the next step? How do we get the Canadians to put Jack Daniels back on their shelves rather than allowing them to continue talking this thing? [1:21:04] And not reaching a resolution on the other side of the border. We've got Mexico. I know you're heading down there this evening. I'm hopeful that your discussions will be productive. [1:21:16] We have companies in Tennessee who are concerned about Mexico's discriminatory use of tax audits. [1:21:25] We see business reports that show us legitimate deductions are disallowed. Significant tax assessments imposed without a meaningful opportunity to challenge them before payment is required. [1:21:40] And inconsistent enforcement that creates substantial uncertainty for companies investing or operating in Mexico. [1:21:49] Is this something you're discussing with the Mexicans? And how can we assure parity for American businesses that are operating in Mexico? [1:22:01] Additionally, you and I have spoken before about the eye tax. I am pleased that several of these have been in the United States. [1:22:09] Several of these have already been reconstituted and many will be joining you in Mexico to provide feedback from industry in a classified setting. [1:22:18] That said, I have auto companies who employ thousands of Tennesseans that are not represented by an ITAC in the USMCA discussions. [1:22:30] So will you commit to working more closely with them to ensure we land in a good spot on issues like rules of origin and content requirements? [1:22:44] Changing gears. We've been paying attention to the Brazil tariffs. Last week, USTR finalized 25% tariffs on imports from Brazil. [1:22:54] When the tariffs were originally proposed, a specialty wood pulp was to be excluded. However, when the action was finalized, that specialty wood pulp was subject to the tariff, even though the domestic supplier cannot meet the industry's demand. [1:23:13] I have a major employer in East Tennessee who will be negatively impacted by this. [1:23:20] I'd welcome the opportunity to help set up a meeting for you or your team so that you can engage directly with these folks who are working to find a solution. [1:23:32] Will you agree to sit down with them? [1:23:36] I also want to touch on China. I spoke last week with several of our Treasury nominees about the importance of holding the Chinese accountable to their commitments. [1:23:47] Soybeans are our largest ag export in Tennessee and China is the largest purchaser of those soybeans. [1:23:56] I'd like to ask you the same question. How are you ensuring when you get commitments from China that they actually follow through? And as you address this issue, how can we stop the nefarious practices we see from them like dumping and transshipment, which has such a negative impact on many of our companies? [1:24:22] I am a little over time. I'm going to look forward to your written response on the questions. So often what we have found in our offices, we're the first stop for companies that are trying to navigate a complex trade environment. [1:24:41] They're looking for certainty. And as you know, many of these companies want to make major capital investments in states like Tennessee and they're utilizing, they want to utilize all the benefits of the working families tax cut. [1:24:58] So we are seeking to work with you to find answers and to bolster manufacturing in the United States. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:25:08] Thank you, Senator Blackburn and Senator Wyden has a quick closing statement and we will be wrapping this hearing up. The vote has already started about 10 minutes. [1:25:16] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and I will be brief. As I indicated in my opening statement today, I introduced legislation to move trade back to where the American people have a voice and that's Congress. [1:25:33] If you take today's situation and what we learned this morning, I don't believe that Congress would go out and put a 50 percent tax on goods and services that jack up prices on the American people. [1:25:46] I think what we would do is we would put Americans first, which is what the founding fathers had in mind. And I think it's very fitting that we had this hearing, Mr. Chairman, on a day when I said it's also time to empower the American voter on this trade issue. [1:26:02] That's what I've done with my legislation and I hope will pick up support on both sides of the aisle. [1:26:07] Mr. Greer, thank you for being with us for questions. Look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman. [1:26:11] Thank you, Senator Wyden. And that does conclude the hearing. [1:26:14] Again, I also want to thank you, Ambassador Greer, for accommodating our having to reschedule and for making the time to come and meet with the committee today. [1:26:23] Congress looks forward to continued collaboration with the administration to advance trade policy that benefits the American people. [1:26:30] With that, I remind my colleagues the deadline for submitting any questions for the record is 5 p.m. next Wednesday, July 29. [1:26:38] And the Finance Committee stands adjourned.