Regarding the job loss data, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) said at the hearing that there are currently 409,000 open positions in manufacturing as of August. And added that due to investments in manufacturing spurred on by industrial policies like the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act, let alone the tariff threat, the U.S. is expected to be short nearly two million manufacturing workers by 2033, NAM said. That does not sound like a segment in contraction. The U.S. is not experiencing European-style deindustrialization because of these policies.
“In our survey this year, we gave them five choices of policy actions that could drive them to bring back what they now import,” Moser told the Committee. “They gave the usual responses for lower taxes, less regulations, lower dollar, and things like that. But they also gave the highest priority to having a skilled workforce. That need was significantly higher than any of the other things politicians typically talk about,” he said, suggesting that the end of the tariff regime was not a top priority.
Are companies reshoring? Moser said they were. The total number of jobs per year reshored has gone from 11,000 in 2010 to 244,000 in 2024, he said. “Those are good results. I’m delighted overall.”
Moser recommended codifying tariffs through legislation.
Rep. Kelly Morrison (D-MN-3) agreed, sort of, saying Congress should be more involved.
“This administration is doing many unprecedented things that should not be normalized. And I just want to take the moment to remind all of us that tariffs should be a tool in Congress’s toolbox.”
Congress has been complaining about tariff policies all year. Yet, there is only one bipartisan pill by Reps. Greg Steube (R-FL-17) and Jared Golden (D-ME-2) that would codify a 10% revenue tariff – imperative to fund the tax cuts in H.R. 1, aka the Big Beautiful Bill – and would remove China from Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR), making their tariffs more permanent. It’s still waiting for initial committee action, much less an actual floor vote.
For her part, Morrison has a bill exempting all small businesses from tariffs and issue refunds. This might happen, at least in part, if the Supreme Court rules that Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to issue broad tariffs worldwide was not intended by that law. Tariff refunds would not impact Section 232 tariffs and would likely not lead to lower prices, but it could possibly cause a U.S. government credit downgrade.
Democrats Keep Anti-Tariff Bias In House Small Business Hearing. Steel and Aluminum Tariffs Criticized by Importers
Democrats on the House Committee on Small Business kept to their year-long messaging that tariffs are raising costs and hurting companies. There were many interesting themes from the Nov. 20 hearing titled How Main Street is Revitalizing Domestic Manufacturing. One is that taxes, regulation, and labor shortages were a bigger problem than tariffs. When it came to tariffs, Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs faced the brunt of criticism even though some Committee members tried to paint that critique with a broader brush. Some said that if the U.S. is going to reshore, it has to start with the big multinationals first as they are the ones who purchase from the smaller players. If global corporations like Costco or Ford are fine with imports due to a variety of factors – labor and regulatory arbitrage being two examples – then they will not be purchasing from the local manufacturer, tariffs or no tariffs.
Ranking Member Nydia Velazquez (D-NY-7) was first out of the gate to criticize “Trump’s tariffs.” She asked one of the two manufacturers invited as witnesses that day to address tariff impacts.
For Shirley Modlin, co-owner of 3D Design and Manufacturing, the main problems were tariff messaging and unpredictability. Her complaints were reasonable. Her main problem was with the steel and aluminum tariffs. [Testimony]
Modlin said that recent trade agreements did not improve things for steel and aluminum imports, but she did not add that those agreements did not include any changes to Section 232 steel and aluminum. The UK might be an exception to the case.
“We’ve been in business since 2005 and we have never experienced such turmoil. This is largely due, unfortunately, to the tariffs,” she said. “Our products are made in America but we rely on aluminum, steel and alloys which are imported from Canada and Mexico. In addition to the bottom line hit, tariffs create this uncertainty. I never know what tomorrow will hold. A 25 percent tariff, a 50 percent tariff, no tariff, tariff on aluminum, tariff on steel, it’s all really uncertain long-term and that makes for a very difficult situation when it comes time for us to set prices for my customers. This unpredictability in the tariff policy is really causing us to question sustainability,” she said.
The Section 232 tariffs for steel and aluminum may be a work in progress. The ecosystem for aluminum is more complex than for steel, with only two multinationals controlling the primary aluminum market. Tariffs have helped them. But down market, for fabricators of goods made from aluminum, the results have been mixed-to-poor. \Ultimately, if the Trump administration wants to protect steel and aluminum producers, including those who make goods from steel and aluminum, tweaks will have to be made to this policy.
Moldin asked for tariff exemptions for small businesses.
Harry Moser, Founder & President of the Reshoring Initiative said exempting small businesses from tariffs sounded like a good idea, but it’s not. [Testimony]
“My fear would be that instead of the big companies importing material, they’d have their suppliers import the material and claim exemption under the Small Business Act,” Moser said. “Then you will also have the companies avoiding tariffs and we would have made the tariffs totally ineffective.”
That is precisely what would happen.
Moser and others on the panel agreed that small businesses should be exempt from importing capital goods. These are large machines, often one-and-done purchases, that are essential to manufacturing other goods.
Kurt Voss, Chief Executive Officer of The AmeriLux Family of Companies, told Rep. Beth Van Duyne (R-TX-24) that he supports tariffs. [Testimony]
“We’ve been competing against foreign competitors since our existence. It’s been very tough because of the unfairness associated with how we’re treated, and because of a strong dollar,” Voss told her. “So this trade policy has been a breath of fresh air for us. We’re gaining business as a result of the tariffs.”
Manufacturing Jobs: Losses, But 400K Openings?
In her opening statement, Ranking Member Velazquez said that there is no manufacturing resurgence.
“The manufacturing sector continues to decline. The Bureau of Labor Statistics released job data showing the U.S. lost an additional 6,000 manufacturing jobs in September. The revised August numbers show a total loss of 92,000 manufacturing jobs over the past year, with nearly a third coming in the past months. These month-over-month decreases are a cause for great concern,” she said, and rightfully so. They are. But these numbers, arguably, could have been reported at any given time in modern history. Recent data points are not going to give us the full picture. Many automotive companies are laying off because EV car sales did not take off as expected, for example, which has nothing to do with tariffs.
Regarding the job loss data, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) said at the hearing that there are currently 409,000 open positions in manufacturing as of August. And added that due to investments in manufacturing spurred on by industrial policies like the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act, let alone the tariff threat, the U.S. is expected to be short nearly two million manufacturing workers by 2033, NAM said. That does not sound like a segment in contraction. The U.S. is not experiencing European-style deindustrialization because of these policies.
“In our survey this year, we gave them five choices of policy actions that could drive them to bring back what they now import,” Moser told the Committee. “They gave the usual responses for lower taxes, less regulations, lower dollar, and things like that. But they also gave the highest priority to having a skilled workforce. That need was significantly higher than any of the other things politicians typically talk about,” he said, suggesting that the end of the tariff regime was not a top priority.
Are companies reshoring? Moser said they were. The total number of jobs per year reshored has gone from 11,000 in 2010 to 244,000 in 2024, he said. “Those are good results. I’m delighted overall.”
Moser recommended codifying tariffs through legislation.
Rep. Kelly Morrison (D-MN-3) agreed, sort of, saying Congress should be more involved.
“This administration is doing many unprecedented things that should not be normalized. And I just want to take the moment to remind all of us that tariffs should be a tool in Congress’s toolbox.”
Congress has been complaining about tariff policies all year. Yet, there is only one bipartisan pill by Reps. Greg Steube (R-FL-17) and Jared Golden (D-ME-2) that would codify a 10% revenue tariff – imperative to fund the tax cuts in H.R. 1, aka the Big Beautiful Bill – and would remove China from Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR), making their tariffs more permanent. It’s still waiting for initial committee action, much less an actual floor vote.
For her part, Morrison has a bill exempting all small businesses from tariffs and issue refunds. This might happen, at least in part, if the Supreme Court rules that Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to issue broad tariffs worldwide was not intended by that law. Tariff refunds would not impact Section 232 tariffs and would likely not lead to lower prices, but it could possibly cause a U.S. government credit downgrade.
MADE IN AMERICA.
CPA is the leading national, bipartisan organization exclusively representing domestic producers and workers across many industries and sectors of the U.S. economy.
TRENDING
China’s Record Trade Surplus and Washington’s Financial Trump Card
House Hearing on China Investment in US Reveals Much More Needs to be Done
The China Dependence Big Pharma Doesn’t Want Washington to See
CPA Celebrates Member PAI Pharma’s Acquisition of Nivagen Pharmaceuticals
CPA Warns Congress Against Extending Failed AGOA Program Ahead of House Vote
The latest CPA news and updates, delivered every Friday.
WATCH: WORTH FIGHTING FOR
Get the latest in CPA news, industry analysis, opinion, and updates from Team CPA.
CHECK OUT THE NEWSROOM ➔