The target is about $30 billion of US imports from China, matched by a Chinese list of similar size, what trade lawyers are calling a "30 for 30" swap. It runs through a new bilateral channel called the US-China Board of Trade, set up after the May 2026 meeting between Presidents Trump and Xi. If you bring goods in from China and pay a Section 301 duty on them, this notice is asking which of those lines should come down. Comments go to a public docket, and a product no one writes in for is argued for by no one.
What USTR is actually asking
The Board of Trade is a standing channel between USTR and China's Ministry of Commerce that adjusts tariffs on "non-sensitive" goods in both directions. USTR's working definition of non-sensitive is a product that raises few or no economic-security, national-security, or supply-chain-resilience concerns. High-technology items and goods with military uses are out. Which categories count as non-sensitive is itself one of the open questions, so the list is not fixed yet. That is what the comments decide.
The duties in play are the Section 301 tariffs on China, and potentially the Section 232 duties on steel and aluminium. They are separate from the IEEPA tariffs the Supreme Court struck down in February 2026, which are being refunded on a different track. This is also not the temporary exclusion process from the first Trump administration, where a product won relief while the tariff itself stayed in place. It aims at a longer-term reduction inside a negotiated framework, so a company whose exclusion request was denied years ago is not bound by that old answer.
Who can file, and what a filing needs
The party that can comment is the importer of record bringing the Chinese goods into the United States, wherever that company is based. A buyer in London, Sydney, or São Paulo who ships product into the US is the importer of record on those entries and can file. USTR wants evidence, not a wish. For each product you need its HS classification, the average annual import value for 2022 through 2024, and a case for why the product is non-sensitive. US exporters can file the mirror request, naming a US-origin product that faces a high Chinese tariff and should drop to China's most-favoured-nation rate, backed by the same three years of data.
Take a homeware importer paying a 25% Section 301 duty on a kitchen product with no defence or high-tech use. That is the kind of line the notice is built to surface. The company files the code, attaches three years of import values, and makes a short argument that the product is non-sensitive, and it lands on the list USTR carries into the negotiation. The importer that stays quiet leaves its rate to whatever the two sides settle on without it.
The window is real, and so are the caveats
USTR has not promised to cut any single line. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has said the US keeps the option to raise China's rate back to its late-2025 level, and separate Section 301 investigations into overcapacity, forced labour, and Phase One compliance could add duties rather than remove them. A comment shapes the negotiating record. It does not guarantee a lower bill. The dates do not move, though. Comments close 10 July, rebuttals 27 July, and a filing thrown together in the last two days rarely carries the data USTR asks for.
A filing is only as strong as the product detail behind it, and two facts do the heavy lifting. The first is the HS code, which sets the duty and depends on the real material composition and function of the finished product. The second is the country of origin, which decides whether the China rate applies at all and depends on which factory actually makes the goods. A buyer working from a quote and a few photos cannot stand behind either one. An agent who has read the factory's business license and classified the finished product on the line it actually runs can. That record is the same one that wins a refund claim or clears a customs query later. If you mean to file before 10 July, lock those two facts first.
Sources: Office of the US Trade Representative, Federal Register notice and public docket USTR-2026-0430 (issued 2 June 2026; comments due 10 July 2026, rebuttals 27 July 2026). Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, "A Rare Opportunity: USTR Solicits Industry Input on Up to $30 Billion in China Import Tariff Relief and Market Access for US Exports" (1 June 2026) — the ~$30bn "30 for 30" framing, the US-China Board of Trade, the "non-sensitive" definition, and the 2022-2024 data USTR requests. Foley & Lardner LLP, "The Opportunity to Shape the Next Phase of U.S.-China Tariffs" (24 June 2026) — how this differs from the prior Section 301 exclusion process and who should consider filing. Elliott Davis, "U.S. tariffs in mid-2026" (24 June 2026) — the Section 301 direction of tariff policy and the separate IEEPA refund track via CBP's CAPE tool.