Section 301 Lists 1 and 2: The Termination Mechanism, the Deadline, and What Importers Should Know

Most importers know Section 301 tariffs exist. Fewer know that the statute behind them built in an automatic expiration clause. Under Section 307(c)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 USC § 2417(c)(1)), if the domestic industries that benefit from a Section 301 action don't submit a written continuation request during the 60 days before a four-year anniversary, the action terminates on that date. USTR has no discretion. It simply expires.

On May 6, 2026, USTR issued a notice initiating the second four-year review of two foundational Section 301 actions: the July 6, 2018 action (List 1, 818 HTS codes, roughly $34 billion in annual trade) and the August 23, 2018 action (List 2, 279 HTS codes, roughly $16 billion). Both impose 25% additional duties on top of base HTS rates. The continuation request window for List 1 closes July 5, 2026. For List 2, August 22, 2026.

How the Termination Mechanism Works

Section 307(c)(1) is blunt. If a four-year period passes and no representative of the domestic industry that benefits from the action submits a continuation request in the preceding 60 days, the action shall terminate. "Shall" isn't discretionary.

The request must come from a "representative" of a "domestic industry which benefits from" the action. In practice, that means US manufacturers competing with the Chinese-origin goods being tariffed: steel mills, machinery producers, semiconductor companies, and chemical manufacturers have standing to file. Importers of Chinese goods do not. Those importers pay the tariffs and generally want them gone, but the statutory structure gives them no role in the continuation decision.

Filing is straightforward. A written request submitted through USTR's comment portal within the applicable window is all it takes. There's no formal evidentiary standard for the request itself. One qualifying submission from any trade association representing affected manufacturers blocks termination for that action.

Once continuation requests are received, USTR announces that the actions will continue and opens a full statutory review. That review must cover: (A) how effective the action has been in achieving Section 301's objectives, and (B) the action's effects on the US economy, including consumers. The outcome can include rate modifications, new product exclusions, or changes to product coverage, in either direction.

What's at Stake: Lists 1 and 2

List 1 targeted capital goods and industrial inputs where USTR's analysts judged Chinese IP transfer practices most egregious and consumer price impact most limited: industrial machinery, CNC machines, pressure equipment, machine tools, aerospace components, motor vehicle parts, and medical devices. USTR estimated $34 billion in annual trade affected at 25%.

List 2 expanded to additional industrial and technology categories: semiconductor manufacturing equipment, printed circuit boards, capacitors and resistors, electric motors, plastics, industrial chemicals, and railway equipment. Another roughly $16 billion in annual trade.

These two lists represent the most explicitly industrial tier of Section 301. Consumer goods sit primarily in List 3 (effective September 24, 2018, covering approximately $200 billion) and List 4A (effective February 14, 2020, covering approximately $120 billion at 7.5%). Those are separate actions with their own statutory clocks and aren't part of the May 2026 review.

One important wrinkle: the 2024 four-year review imposed rate increases tied to these same underlying actions. Electric vehicle tariffs went from 25% to 100%, solar cells from 25% to 50%, certain semiconductors from 25% to 50%, and certain steel and aluminum products from 7.5% to 25%. Those increases were implemented as modifications to the July 6 and August 23, 2018 actions. If those underlying actions terminate, the modifications built on them would terminate as well.

What the First Review Actually Produced

The first statutory four-year review of Lists 1 and 2 was initiated in May 2022, covering actions that hit their four-year anniversaries that summer. About 1,500 written submissions came in. Domestic industries across the affected sectors (steel, semiconductors, solar, manufacturing equipment, chemicals) filed continuation requests. Termination was never close.

USTR's findings, published in a report in May 2024, concluded that China had not eliminated the unfair technology transfer practices that justified the original Section 301 investigation. The Biden administration's finalized modifications in September 2024 raised rates on strategically significant sectors, taking effect in stages from August 2024 through January 2026.

The tariffs didn't just continue. The review made some of them considerably more severe.

That's the pattern importers should carry into this second review. When the statutory mechanism triggers, the process doesn't default toward reducing tariffs. It opens a rulemaking channel that domestic industry stakeholders use to argue for continuation and, where possible, rate increases on products where they feel most competitively exposed to Chinese imports.

Is Termination Actually Possible?

In theory, yes. For Lists 1 and 2 in the current cycle, it isn't happening.

The product scope of these two lists covers exactly the industrial goods where US manufacturers have been most vocal about Chinese competition. The National Association of Manufacturers, the Semiconductor Industry Association, the American Chemistry Council, and comparable trade groups are aware of these deadlines and have clear incentive to file. One qualifying request is enough to block termination for that action.

The current administration's posture toward China trade doesn't suggest appetite for letting these tariffs lapse. And even the bilateral trade discussions that produced announced agreements in May 2026 haven't resulted in anything that formally supersedes the Section 301 structure.

That said, the mechanism matters regardless of the likely outcome this cycle. If an action terminated for any of those reasons, relief would be immediate and prospective. Duties already paid don't come back. New shipments under affected HTS codes would pay only the base rate plus whatever other stacks remain.

Which brings up a critical point about stacking. Section 301 tariffs sit on top of, not instead of, other duty obligations. If Lists 1 and 2 terminated on a product carrying an antidumping order, the AD duty continues. If any IEEPA authority survived to apply on Chinese-origin goods, that layer continues. For some goods on Lists 1 and 2, the residual duty stack after Section 301 removal would still be substantial.

What to Watch and What to Do

Check your HTS codes against Lists 1 and 2. Section 301 applicability is determined at the 8-digit level. If you import industrial machinery, semiconductor equipment, electronic components, or chemicals from China, run your 8-digit codes against the USTR's July 6, 2018 and August 23, 2018 lists. The HTS code lookup shows the Section 301 list assignment and current rate for any code in the 2026 schedule.

Don't hold sourcing decisions on termination. Five weeks remain before the List 1 window closes. Even in the wildly unlikely scenario that no continuation requests arrived, tariff relief would be prospective only from July 6, 2026 forward. Goods cleared before that date would not receive refunds. There's no operational case for pausing supply chain decisions while watching this unfold.

Watch for List 3's separate notice. List 3, the $200 billion list covering broad industrial and consumer goods, became effective September 24, 2018. Its eight-year anniversary falls in September 2026. USTR has not yet published a second four-year review notice for that action. A separate notice should be expected in the coming weeks. List 3's scope is considerably wider than Lists 1 and 2: furniture, electronics, auto parts, construction materials. The same termination mechanism applies.

Participate in the review if it proceeds. When continuation requests are received, USTR opens a comment period. Any affected party, including importers, can submit evidence on the tariffs' economic effects, request product-specific exclusions, or argue for rate adjustments on specific HTS codes. This is the formal channel for importer-side input, and it's available during the review even though importers don't control the continuation decision.

Set rate alerts on affected HTS codes. If the review mirrors the first, final rate modifications would appear two to three years after initiation, likely 2028 or 2029. The practical impact on your landed cost shows up when modifications take effect, not when the review is announced. Monitoring duty rate changes on your specific codes is the operational version of tracking this review.

Key Takeaways

19 USC § 2417(c)(1) terminates Section 301 actions automatically on their four-year anniversary if domestic industry doesn't file a written continuation request in the preceding 60-day window. USTR cannot override a termination.
USTR's May 6, 2026 notice covers the July 6, 2018 action (List 1, 818 codes, ~$34B in trade at 25%) and the August 23, 2018 action (List 2, 279 codes, ~$16B in trade at 25%). Continuation requests for List 1 are due by July 5, 2026; for List 2, by August 22, 2026.
The first four-year review (2022–2024) resulted in full continuation plus rate increases on EVs (to 100%), solar cells (to 50%), semiconductors (to 50%), and steel and aluminum. Those 2024 modifications attach to the same underlying actions now under review.
Termination in the absence of any continuation request is historically unprecedented for major Section 301 actions and is extremely unlikely given the breadth of affected domestic industries.
List 3 (effective September 24, 2018, ~$200B) is a separate action on its own statutory clock, with an eight-year anniversary in September 2026. List 4A (effective February 14, 2020) reaches its eight-year mark in February 2028. Neither is part of the current May 2026 review.
Even if Lists 1 and 2 terminated, base HTS duties, applicable AD/CVD orders, and any surviving IEEPA authority would remain independently. Section 301 termination reduces landed cost by the Section 301 rate on affected codes. It doesn't clear the full duty stack.

Knowing your Section 301 exposure starts with the correct 10-digit HTS code. TariffClassify shows you the full duty stack — base rate, Section 301 list, IEEPA, and AD/CVD — for any product, free for your first classification. To get notified when rates change as the review progresses, save your key SKUs to the tariff rate alert watchlist.