Hearings to examine the President's 2026 trade policy agenda.

Come to order?

All right.

Senator Wyden will be in the room in any at any minute. Uh, I'm starting without him, with his permission, uh, because I am going to have to, uh, make my opening statement and then leave to the budget committee very quickly. And I will turn the gavel over to Senator Wyden for his opening statement. And then he will continue to run the meeting till I get back. So, Ambassador,

Yeah.

But uh, rules are rules around here and I've gotta be present for a vote at ten ten

OK.

in a few minutes. Um, with that, hey you understand, I have to step out.

Fine. Yeah, yeah, fine.

Again, uh, I will open the hearing by welcoming you again, Ambassador. Thank you for appearing before the finance committee to discuss the President's twenty twenty six annual trade agenda. Uh, we also appreciate you and your team with us to reschedule this hearing, which we had to cancel once before because we were on the floor till about two in the morning.

Yeah.

Trade policy remains a cornerstone of our nation's economic strength, our global leadership, and our ability to create opportunities for American farmers, ranchers, businesses, and workers. The trade landscape has evolved significantly since you last testified before the committee on the President's trade agenda. Today's hearing is an opportunity to take stock. of where we are and where we need to go. Together, the administration and Congress can build a durable policy and enforcement regime around a fair application of long-standing American trade goals. First, US trade policy must reflect our strategic priorities. The administration has maintained a firm stance in addressing non-market policies and practices that distort competition, and disadvantage American workers and companies. The administration also continues to emphasize rebuilding domestic manufacturing capacity and securing critical supply chains. Second, US trade policy must reflect economic realities. Market access matters. It remains a fundamental driver of American economic growth. American producers and service providers depend on the ability to compete fairly in global markets. unfair and discriminatory barriers to US exports must be removed, whether through tariff reductions, the elimination of non-tariff barriers, or the establishment of clear and transparent rules, creating opportunities for businesses of all sizes and supporting high-quality jobs here at home. To understand why we need to do this, we need to look no further than to the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or the USMCA. The USMCA supports thirteen million American jobs, represents a fifty-five percent increase in investments in the US from Canada and Mexico compared to pre-USMCA levels, and has led to sixty billion dollars in exports in agricultural goods, nearly one-third of all US agriculture exp exports. Third, market access must be paired with strong enforcement for USMCA and other trade agreements. to remain effectual. Robust enforcement ensures a level playing field and sends a clear signal that the United States stands behind its farmers, workers, and businesses.

OK.

Fair market access and its enforcement is constantly tested by unfair trade practices used against our farmers and ranchers. Idaho producers often tell me about how these practices create significant economic hardships for our agriculture community. including among our dairy, onion, potato, sheep, and sugar beet industries. Meanwhile, a growing array of discriminatory measures in the form of digital service taxes, on-line content requirements, and data localization target US digital firms and restrict US competition barriers. These people, these pose an ex- existential threat to American innovation. Similarly, concerns with foreign pharmaceutical price controls as the US begins to negotiate pharmaceutical deals. Finally, business certainty in the trade environment is crucial for American industry to take full advantage of market opening opportunities so they can grow and compete effectively in all these matters close collaboration and consultation between Congress and the administration is essential to advance the policies needed to promote durable growth and fairness. A combined effort between Congress and the administration is the most effective means by which to identify new opportunities for market access, strengthen enforcement tools, and meet emerging challenges in the global trading system. The challenges and opportunities in global trade are complex, but they present a chance to strengthen our economy and reaffirm our leadership on the world stage. Ambassador, I look forward to continuing to work closely with you to advance

Thank you very much, uh, Mr. Chairman, and, uh,

Thank you.

Ambassador Greer, glad to have a chance to talk about these crucial issues this morning. The Trump trade agenda is dominated by big promises. First, he promised lower costs. Second, he promised to be tough on China. Third, he promised to open up new markets for American farmers and small businesses. These promises haven't panned out. About a year and a half into the Trump's second term, farmers are on the ropes. I was just home for six open-all town hall meetings in rural Oregon, in communities where Donald Trump got more than seventy percent of the vote. And I can tell you, the wheat farmers in eastern Oregon told me they are barely hanging on to family farms. They're getting hammered by high prices for key inputs, inputs like fuel and equipment. The small businesses, like a local toy shop in Portland, are closing their doors after tariffs, high tariffs, made their businesses impossible. Uncertainty is costing workers' jobs, including at Portland Corp, at Portland Coffee roasters, supply chains have been disrupted, small businesses are delaying investments, and new employees in manufacturing. Like so many other promises, Donald Trump has made to working people. The set, the second he set foot in the White House, he did nothing to put American businesses and workers first. What he did is he embarked on a tariff spree that put the cost of living crisis on steroids in America. The Supreme Court eventually overturned the Trump global tariffs, but the higher costs are here to stay. In twenty twenty five, the Trump tariffs cost the average American family one thousand seven hundred dollars with grocery and gas prices way up. This week, Donald Trump announced massive new tariffs on clothes and school supplies, and other products from Canada, using a provision based in the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of nineteen thirty. Americans ought to know that nobody, not even Herbert Hoover, used this provision before, but Donald Trump dug up a zombie law to make things even more expensive for Americans. Trump's next trade scheme is ordering USTR to reconstruct his illegal global tariffs under the guise of addressing forced labor. As I've recently said, if the administration wants to get serious about forced labor, The first step is to look at its own enforcement record. Donald Trump has failed to enforce the laws that we've got in the books, and has cut cut government efforts dedicated to fighting forced labor around the world. Ambassador Greer, at our hearing last year, you told us that nearly fifty countries had approached you, and those countries were clamoring for trade deals. Instead of agreements, what I've seen is we have press releases and announcements about supposed deals that haven't been approved by congress, haven't been enforced, haven't opened markets, and haven't reduced tariffs. My own take on these uh proposals is there is no there there. The one piece of the Trump administration trade agenda that does seem to be progressing is the corrupt enrichment of so many in the Trump uh uh orbit, his family, his allies, and himself. Donald Trump lowered tariffs on Switzerland after billionaires gifted Trump a gold bar worth more than a hundred thousand dollars. A Korean company under investigation for trade cheating paid the Trump hold holding company two million dollars and the administration waived export restrictions on the UAE after an Emirati company invested five hundred million dollars in the Trump cryptocurrency agenda. I could go on. We've got a busy morning. The bottom line is American families are paying more in tariffs So Donald Trump and his cronies can profit. My own take is the way to stop this corruption and chaos is to take unfettered tariff power away from the president. It's well past time to put Congress back in the driver's seat on trade. That's why today I'm able to introduce the Congressional Trade Powers Reform Act. It overhauls existing trade powers to ensure that no future presidential administration can abuse its authority on trade and thrust the country into a cost of living crisis. It would require congressional approval of any tariff proposed by the president. And it would establish an advisory committee to ensure that Congress actually is in a position to exercise its rightful oversight over tariffs and trade. It is time to restore consistency, reliability, and success in our country's trade agenda. That's what my bill is all about, and I look forward to talking to colleagues on both sides of the aisle on that. I look forward to today's question and answer, Ambassador, we're glad you're here as I've said, and please proceed.

Uh, thank you, Ranking Member Wyden, uh, Chairman Crapo, Senator Bennett, and the rest of the committee. Uh, I also thank you for keeping in touch with me as USTR has prioritized our consultations with Congress during this busy time for trade policy. As you know, the President's trade policy in twenty twenty-five was characterized by a national emergency, a one point two trillion dollar trade deficit, which had exploded forty percent in the prior four years, and an industrial base too atrophied to support our national security and economic competitiveness adequately let alone support a strong middle class. That national emergency still persists and so our policy remains the same. The specific authorities this administration is using have changed, but the trade strategy has not. We are committed to continuing to use tariffs and to negotiate deals to support the re-industrialization of our economy, protect American workers and increase their wages, and shrink our trade deficit. The problems the President's trade policy seeks to solve are generational. These things were not broken in a day, and they won't be fixed overnight, but they must be fixed. This is why I'm pleased to report that the combination of tariffs and deals core to the President's trade policy has yielded quick and impressive results. For starters, the United States currently has nineteen framework or reciprocal trade deals covering thirty-two percent of global gross domestic product. Here's one in my hand. It's the deal with Indonesia. Uh, it's substantive. There are annexes, there are tariff schedules of all the things that they'll be reducing for the United States. And I have a dozen more deals like this. Uh, the new market access secured in these deals and the protection they offer from unfair trade practices has been a boon to our producers. Goods and services exports have marked the highest monthly levels on record in American history from February through May of this year. Everyone said trade would collapse. We've never exported as much as we are now. And on the other side of the ledger, capital goods represent the largest share of our imports ever, accounting for thirty-three percent of imports in twenty-twenty-five and forty percent so far this year. In other words, we've shifted the bulk of our imports, uh, from consumer goods and autos to things we need to scale re-industrialization, like machine tools, injection molding equipment, and computing equipment. Uh, in other words, the United States has not stopped trading with the world, but the composition of that trade has changed in a way that benefits Americans. We're selling more to the world than ever before because of our increased capacity and our imports are increasingly the type of goods that help us produce even more here in America. And these dynamics have helped reduce our trade deficit. After the introduction of the President's reciprocal trade program in April, twenty twenty five, the US trade deficit in goods for the twelve months ending in May, twenty twenty six, uh decreased by twenty four percent compared with the same period a year earlier. Instead of an average annual eight percent increase in the trade deficit we experienced under President Biden in twenty twenty five under President Trump, that rate of increase slowed substantially and now it's being reversed. For agricultural trade specifically, the story is even better. President Biden left office with a monthly ag trade deficit of six point two billion. Under President Trump it's under three billion, and we are on the road to an agricultural trade surplus again. Services exports have also taken advantage of new market access. In twenty twenty five, the US services trade surplus reached a record high of three hundred and twenty-seven billion. A large part of the positive change in our trade deficit is due to reduced dependence on China. Our trade deficit in goods with China fell two hundred billion in twenty twenty five, the lowest it's been since two thousand five. And China's share of total US imports fell to about nine percent, the lowest it has been since China joined the World Trade Organization in two thousand one. So these trends are good for our economy and our national security, but they're really good for the individual workers and the families who make up that economy. Real manufacturing worker pay has increased by over two thousand dollars under President Trump after falling over eight hundred dollars during President Biden's, four years in office. Manufacturing productivity surged by two point four percent in the last quarter of twenty twenty five compared to the same period in twenty twenty four and manufacturing wages increased by four point seven percent. In other words, the average American manufacturing worker is producing more goods and getting paid more to do it, and there are over half a million open manufacturing jobs. So there's a lot of opportunity here. In June, the consumer price index fell point four percent, the largest decline since April twenty twenty, and far below the expectations of a one point one percent drop. Uh, core inflation was two point six percent year over year, down from three point three percent in January of twenty twenty five. And again, better than market expectations. I'm looking forward today to talking to you more about our section three O one investigations, about where we are with USMCA. Uh, about our critical minerals and a variety of other initiatives that we have. And and I really just wanna close with with this thought. Fundamentally, all of these initiatives and the trade policy overall aim to answer the question, of what should our economy look like. For President Trump and his administration the answer is clear. We want an economy that is resilient from shocks and not dependent on foreign production for critical goods. We want an economy with an increased level of manufacturing, certainty of food security, and a robust services sector. We want an economy benefiting from an international economic system that promotes fairness and balance. We want an economy that prioritizes American workers by protecting them from unfair trading practices and create economic conditions that raise their wages. An economy that looks like this is one everyone supports, I'm sure, and I look forward to our conversation today and working with you to continue to make this economic vision a reality.

Thank you very much, um, Mister Ambassador. Let me start with the the proposition that it just seems to me that on tariffs the administration has lost the plot. And in particular, let's look at what happened in the last couple days. Just a few days ago, Canada, our closest neighbor, basically learned they were gonna get fifty percent uh you know tariffs at the same time when it comes to china one of the biggest trade cheats there is it seems that the administration rolls out the red carpet you're standing up a so-called board of trade to lower tariffs on goods from china looks like he's thrown in the towel so a couple of questions yes or no when the new tariff on canada takes effect will canada have higher tariffs than china on some products

on a small

On a small handful, China's by far uh much higher than Canada overall, by far, no question.

Well, let me work through that uh, you know, math. I mean, the fifty percent tariff is higher than a number of tariffs on China.

So we have a hundred percent tariffs on EVs coming in from China, we have about forty-five to fifty percent on most things coming in from China, we have a small handful of goods, about twenty billion dollars worth of goods coming in from Canada, all the steel and aluminum from China, well over fifty percent,

But uh, just pers- respectfully,

some in triple digits.

the question is, are there some uh areas where the Can- Canadian tariffs are higher than China's? And it seems to me that fifty percent is the accurate one.

We we can do an analysis because we have stacking tariffs on China that don't apply to other countries, uh, so we're happy to get back to you. But overall China is, uh, by far subject to very high tariffs.

We'll we'll look forward to having that information on the record because our staff believes that there are instances where the uh uh Canadians are gonna pay higher tariffs than the Chinese are, and that's not right. I wanted to ask next about something that really has been an interest of mine since my days with the great great panthers and that's the whole question of pharma prices you negotiate an agreement with the UK for their government to pay drug companies twenty five percent more money for new medicine. So it looks to me, and this is a field that I've worked in for a long time, you negotiate a deal to put more money into the pockets of big pharma and it just looks like the drug companies again are just getting ahead now trump claims that this extra money for big pharma is gonna somehow lower drug cost for patients in the united states but the deals between big pharma and the trump administration are completely secret and it seems to me if they were such good deals for people it would be public so my question to you is And I'd like your uh answer again as a yes or no. Will you push for release of the written agreements with these pharmaceutical companies now?

So uh uh Senator, the the domestic deals, I don't have jurisdiction over those, so I don't I I don't I don't have any role to play in that. Our deal with the UK is public.

But the question was, I need people in the administration who have responsibility in trade to push for the release of these written details. So this is a question of yes or no, will you use your office to push for release of that written data because you've been involved in some aspects of pharmaceuticals.

For for for our deals with foreign countries, they're public, uh if there's a domestic deal between a domestic company to lower prices, uh that's up to other agencies, HHS and others. I'm happy to bring your concern back to those agencies, cuz I wanna work with you on this.

I'm I'm glad you're bringing my concern, but again, we'll talk some more about it, I think. I wanna make sure that people in the administration are pushing for release of that data. The American people have a right to know. Frankly, if they were actually lowering prices for consumers, I think it'd be trumpeted from the mountaintop. But I want people in the administration who are gonna push for that release. We'll talk further about it. Mr. Chairman, where we are is uh uh I finished my uh opening statement and my questions and uh we have a list of members in order of uh appearance.

I get to go next?

I gather we may be able to give you the power.

Alright, thank you, Mister uh, Mister Chairman and Wyden. Um,

Where we are?

again, it's sorry I had to step out, uh, but uh, I do have your opening statement and I'm familiar with your your statement. I uh, my first question, Ambassador, is that during our committee's February USMCA hearing, my colleagues made clear on a bipartisan basis that the USMCA is vital to our economy and should be fully enforced. What do you view as a realistic time-line for conclusion of the USMCA negotiations that are currently underway keeping in mind the importance of business certainty?

Thank you, Chairman, and and I appreciate the the frequent conversations we've had, both you and I and with the committee on USMCA. Uh, a- after this hearing, I'm actually flying down to Mexico City. uh to meet with President Scheinbaum, to meet with uh Secretary Abraard, uh the team is down there negotiating. So we're moving uh with all due speed on all of this. Um there are s- there are some issues in USMCA which take a longer time to address. Issues that are quite important. Uh some of these are related to rules of origin. Uh we want rules of origin and USMCA to be very strong to incentivize production in North America as opposed to other regions that have a lot of excess capacity or non-market But it does take time to to develop these. Uh, similarly I've heard from from folks uh uh also in Congress about the need to strengthen labor and environment enforcement vis-a-vis Mexico. Uh, this can take time as well. That being said, I'm hopeful uh that before the end of the year uh we can have at least options for President Trump uh and the leaders of Canada and or Mexico to consider potential uh interim interim arrangements or or things that Canada can do on the one hand,

Thank you, and I and I appreciate your It's a very high uh priority for us. Uh, next, market access for US agriculture exports is also, as you know, one of my top priorities. The administration's agreements on reciprocal trade include many very important market access provisions. Could you provide a status update on the implementation and entry into force of these agreements?

Uh, certainly. So, uh, Some countries, such as uh Argentina and Cambodia, have already started the process of removing tariffs. Cambodia, for example, has already removed all of its tariffs for us. Uh, we have some smaller markets uh that maybe are not huge for us, like North Macedonia, that have they've removed all uh all of their tariffs. Uh, I had the Malaysian Trade Minister in my office yesterday, and we talked about their time frame. Um, you know, they're looking to the fall uh to put through uh the changes. Again, they're reducing all of their tariffs to to zero, they're they're removing uh, non-tariff barriers that have been a problem for us for a long time. Uh, Indonesia is in a similar position of in the fall looking to implement fully all of their commitments. Uh, so we have a number of these, uh, agreements in place. Uh, we have, um, you know, we have a, an agreement with Jordan we signed yesterday. Uh, they've already taken action, uh, to, to further liberalize, uh, their market toward us. We have Israel that has just passed in, in the Knesset an agreement to accept American standards. So, a variety of these countries have already implemented, others are going through their domestic processes, and of course importantly we have the EU that lowered their industrial tariffs to zero and provided a number of tariff rate quotas uh for American farmers, uh earlier this month.

Thank you, and finally uh what assurances and steps is USTR seeking and taking to ensure that these commitments are durable and enforced over time?

Uh, so this word enforcement enforcement is so important uh to our administration. I know it's important to this committee. And and trade enforcement, it means tariffs. Uh, when you ha- even when you have dispute settlement or a formal process that goes on for years, at the end of the day if you win, a tariff is the implementing sanction i- if folks don't do this. So, we expect these compa- these countries to implement. Uh, we expect in the future that these countries will retain these agreements, uh, because they've made them to the United States of America. Uh, as long as I'm here, you can count on me to use whatever tools I have, whether it's section three O one or other tools to enforce these agreements. My hope would be that any successor uh would take the same strong approach to enforcing these agreements and promises.

Thank you. Senator Grassley.

And agriculture are very much a problem for the family farmer and uh uh i wanna compliment the president for delaying the eighteen percent uh duties on morocco uh phosphate coming into our country so that uh mosaic has some competition they got eighty five percent of the market already we have two suppliers of anhydrous ammonia in america so can we get a commitment to working with our trading partners to increase the availability of fertilizers generally for us farmers but most importantly removing any tariffs that on anhydrous ammonia in other words we gotta get a bigger supply you just can't have two companies ooh yeah dominating the whole market of nitrogen for corn farmers

Uh, thank you, Senator. I know this has been an important issue for you. Uh, throughout the the program that the President has had, uh, he has he's been very nuanced on the fertilizer supply chain. We'll continue to work with you to make sure if there are areas, uh, where you think we need more nuance, we'll do that. Um, so we appreciate your attention to this. We want to have strike the right balance between emphasizing domestic production, which gives our farmers security. We don't want to be relying on a country like China, which shuts fertilizer uh exports on and off at will uh or or have our producers here be subject to, you know, devastating subsidies from other countries. Uh but we want fair competition, whether it comes from import or made domestically. We want to have as much security here. We want to have a level playing field. 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. It's so important to have food security. So I agree with you on these issues.

Well, if you wanna increase supply, uh get mosaic to quit shutdown plants that they have with their phosphate production. Let's go to China. They have uh placed uh unfair export restrictions on fertilizer products, upsetting global markets for fertilizer. What can you do to get the Chinese to remove these export restrictions in future trade negotiations with China?

Well, so so China, as I think we all know, you know, China's economic policies are closely tied to their political policies. Um, and they aren't a, they aren't a free market economy. I don't think they will be, uh, any time soon. And so they like to weaponize, uh, these types of things. Um, and, and sometimes they do it to control their own, um, supply, right? I hear you talking about we want supply for our farmers. They're desperately trying to be food secure themselves, which again I don't, I don't countenance them in all their weaponization. Um, so we, we certainly can talk to them about it. We can raise it with them. Um, but remember that the Chinese, they have their own goals, which are not, not the goals of capitalists or free marketeers. Their goal is to, uh, have their own supply chain. They wanna control fertilizer for their own use. Um, they'll weaponize it at will. We'll work with them. We have a, we have a working relationship with them. We've been able to get concessions from them. So if it's important to you, I'll raise it with them, but we should all be realistic about those possibilities.

USMCA has showed its value to the economies of all three countries because it's dramatically improved, uh the economies of the countries and the increased trade that's happened. Uh all segments of the c- uh uh economy in all countries but particularly for agriculture, it's been very good. And so we have uh, United States uh and Mexico failed to reach an agreement on Mexican tomato exports. The Mexican government then launched an investigation and unfair trade practices of the uh US pork industry. Ahead of further negotiations with Mexico this week, what is USTR doing to insure Iowa pig farmers because we're number one in the production of pork, uh we so we don't get caught up in the crossfire of trade retaliation.

Uh well, well fortunately Mexico has not retaliated against us, uh I know they have an open investigation. uh on on pork and I have raised this repeatedly with my counterpart. Uh the Mexicans have been very pragmatic, they are quite dependent on our market uh for their for their growth 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. Uh and they understand that if they take action on pork uh the consequences for them could be uh quite challenging um given their dependence on us. So this is something that's important to me, it's something I've raised at the highest levels with the Mexican government. And and trust me, we are monitoring this and uh 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 we've been able to enjoy over the past several years.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Bennett.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, and I wanna thank you and the ranking member for having this committee, Ambassador Greer. Thank you for coming back to the committee. Uh, as everybody, I hope, knows um We are in a moment for real, a real crisis for our family farmers and for ranchers all over the country, including in Colorado. 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. 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. I know you've talked about the need to resurrect American manufacturing through tariffs and other means, but American agriculture remains globally competitive. 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, but today many producers are operating on th- on thinner margins than ever before, in part because of the input cost that you were talking about. Next generation of farmers is struggling to start out or to take over family operations. This is a crisis. And that makes stable and reliable policy more important than ever. Canada and Mexico, as you know, purchase nearly sixty billion dollars in US agricultural products each year. They are two largest agricultural export markets and are among the most important markets for Colorado. And the USMCA provides the foundation for this trade. 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. 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? And how are you approaching the risk of retaliatory tariffs from Canada, now that you've imposed fifty percent duties on a wide range of products that were previously exempt? What economic effects do you anticipate? you're creating for farmers and ranchers in as result of those tariffs.

uh 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

with with respect with respect mister best sir that is not an answer to my question nor is it an answer to

and now we're back on the road to surplus

the crisis that our farmers and ranchers are facing the the fact that is irrelevant to the discussion

the crisis came from president biden we went into deficit under president biden

mister chairman may i ask my question please, or could you answer the question? 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 and it has absolutely nothing to do with the question I'm asking you which is, are you gonna 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, rather than continuing to undermine their position, uh, which which has been undermined from the very beginning of this administration till today. That's the question. And a a partisan discussion about Biden versus Trump, that's not what our farmers and ranchers are looking for. And by the way, speaking of free market capitalism, I'll tell you what, they're also not looking for. 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. So I have asked you a s- respectful question with respect to the USMCA. Please answer that question.

One hundred percent we're maintaining that market access, cuz we have to dig out of this deficit in ag we were left with. A hundred percent we've expanded market acce- we're keeping the market access in Canada and Mexico. I talked with my Canadian counterpart yesterday. They did not say they're going to retaliate on what they're doing. Uh, 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, maintaining and expanding. That's what we've done. That's why we're back on the road to an X surplus.

But um, when you're, when you're talking about, you know, the open market in North North Macedonia, I'm sure you're proud of that. The result, the r- the reality is that we are now losing this, our global leadership to Brazil as a result of the failed trade policy with respect to China. 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. 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, 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. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Senator Whitehouse.

Thanks very much. Uh, welcome, Ambassador Greer. We've had um conversations before about uh foreign companies gaining trade advantage um by being allowed to pollute

Right, OK.

to lower uh pollution standards than we require at home And you have, and your entire team has repeatedly said that, yeah, that kind of behavior is a proper occasion for a tariff adjustment. Do you still believe that?

Uh, I do believe that, yes.

OK, good. Um, the um the multiple United States administrations have had a problem with enforcing environmental requirements in our trade agreements. Um, I've condemned I think every administration since I've been here for crap enforcement, excuse my language, of uh environmental requirements. Um, I understand that you are trying to improve on that. Could you describe the improvements you are pursuing?

Thank you, Senator, and and I'm i'm grateful for your leadership on this issue where we have a lot of agreement. Uh, one of the things we're doing as we're uh 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 uh so that's one thing we're doing um more recently on Brazil, we've had complaints for years, including from many members on this committee about Brazil uh Brazil's deforestation practices, which actually give them unfair advantage over our farmers. And so we've taken section three O one action on deforestation on Brazil, and we've taken a firm stance there. So those are just a couple of things we're doing. We're exploring.

Continue, continue to raise your game.

Yes, sir.

Our game from this country has really been on the floor always. Uh, this is a rare area of agreement, and I think bipartisan. Uh, so keep going at it. On the question of tariff refunds, Rhode Island is a small business 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. Um, I have two concerns. We've spoken about this before. I have two concerns about the refund situation. 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, great, you can go back and get your refunds. If you're a small business that got whacked by a tariff, it's not easy. 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. It could end up just in corporate profits, CEO bonuses, and all of that. Could you explain what you're doing to try to make sure that the tariff refund process is more open to small businesses, and to make sure that the tariff refunds paid for by consumers initially, aren't just pocketed by CEOs as bonuses?

Um, thank you, Senator. So, first of all, the Customs and Border Protection operates a web site, a portal, From what I understand, it is, it is, it has a relatively straight forward user interface. Uh, if there was an importer of record, whether they were a foreign importer of record or, or a US one, uh, if they were able to file with CBP to pay a tariff, they can use uh this new web site to, to, to uh to recuperate it. Uh, so the, there should be, if there's a company that's able to pay a tariff, they're able to use this, this web site to, to get it back. And if you have specific um, constituents who have had a challenge with that, uh, let me know, we'll connect them with CBP because it shouldn't be like that.

OK, good, I will, I'll follow up.

On your on your other point though,

Constitution by constitution.

you know, I I don't concede that the tariffs went went through to consumers. A lot of them were eaten by foreign companies, a lot of them were deluded in the supply chain, and and the reason why they're going back,

Well, if they were, if

can I, sir, may I? The the reason why they're

No, because you can't because I'm the one who has the limited time here. You're here all day, I've got five minutes.

OK. Alright, you don't want an answer.

So, that's why I wanna jump back in. If in fact it's not paid by the American side, it would make no sense to be making refunds. So, just your behavior with tariff refunds proves the point that it's not just paid, uh, by foreigners or foreign governments or China or, or whomever. So let me make that point. Last, let me just say that, you know, Americans are having a real cost problem. And I think that some of that relates back to the tariff decisions. Anybody who's got a small business or who's gonna buy something, that has a component that is manufactured in Canada that now has a fifty percent added cost associated with it I think it's gonna have a real problem 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 um inordinate tariff uh assessments so good luck with that

Thank you, Senator Cornyn.

Ambassador Greer, on July the first, the um US formally declined to renew the USMCA during the joint review, yet as you know uh the uh it remains in effect essentially with an annual review process. But what are we to make of the administration's decision to uh declining to renew the USMCA?

So, Senator, uh, when you look at July one,

Zero.

the the options are you can rubber-stamp the agreement and renew it without further um revisions, Yeah, we should do that. Exactly. or you can enter into this period, right, where we decline to renew, We should do a review of that, definitely. um, and and see if there are ways to improve the trading relationship. Uh, and so you should look at it in in the latter way. Um, the Pre- President Trump already last year, some of the problems he sees in USMCA and outcomes in,

That's right.

you know, exploding trade deficit with Mexico not enough auto investment in the US some of those problems he has already started to address uh with the section two thirty-two action on autos but there are lot of things that we need to cover uh with Mexico like rules of origin we wanna 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

so the administration wants to make the uh make it better

We wanna improve our trading relationships with Canada and Mexico. There there are

I'll let her give some

there are some what I would call load-bearing pillars in USMCA,

question.

things we don't think about in terms of our ag market access which we've talked about, you know, services, a variety of things where we haven't seen issues, but where we have seen issues. We're already in process of of fixing it to make sure we can get more production here in the US.

As you know the Mexico has consistently not lived up to its obligations under the nineteen forty-four water treaty. with the united states uh i appreciate the work the trump administration has done

yeah

to bring them into compliance at least on a temporary basis but because this is for a period of five years the the term of five years to comply with the requirements of the treaty it leaves our farmers uh basically high and dry literally um when they don't comply on a regular basis is there any way that the joint review process can reinforce those compliance and accountability uh for Mexico to help safeguard our farmers in uh South Texas.

Well, I I guess what I would say, first of all this is largely a a state department jurisdiction issue because of the treaty, and and USDA you know helps, and and we monitor it because people have expressed interest. During during the review process it is clear from President Trump's perspective that if we wanna have a beneficial trading relationship with Mexico um and and have some kind of arrangement with them They also need to be playing ball on this issue. Um, obviously there are border security issu- there are variety of issues that aren't right in my wheelhouse but the president is gonna have a hard time, uh, agreeing to renewal or even revisions if Mexico isn't playing ball on all areas and the water treaty is one of them.