On April 14, 2025, the US Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) announced the initiation of investigations into the effects on US national security of imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients1 and imports of semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment.2 BIS is conducting the investigations under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, a law that empowers the president to restrict imports of products that are found to threaten to impair national security.3 Section 232 investigations can take up to 270 days to complete, but the Trump administration has signaled it intends to move faster. President Trump and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick have said the intent of the investigations is to enable the imposition of tariffs within the next month or two. Like the copper and timber, lumber, and wood products Section 232 investigations announced in March, the two new initiation notices provide unusually short timespans for public comments and do not mention any prospective public hearings.
The pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients investigation
The pharmaceutical initiation notice describes the scope of the investigation as "pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, medical countermeasures, critical inputs such as active pharmaceutical ingredients, and key starting materials, and derivative products of those items."
The semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment investigation
The semiconductor initiation notice describes the scope of the investigation as "semiconductors, semiconductor manufacturing equipment [SME], and their derivative products. This includes, among other things, semiconductor substrates and bare wafers, legacy chips, leading-edge chips, microelectronics, and SME components. Derivative products include downstream products that contain semiconductors, such as those that make up the electronics supply chain."
Opportunity for public comments
Interested stakeholders may submit comments through the two public dockets at regulations.gov. Comments are due by May 7, 2025 (21 days after the publication of the initiation notices in the Federal Register). The notices provide additional instructions on how to participate and submit comments. BIS will consider and respond to public comments as it conducts the investigations. Participating in the public comment process can help shape the outcome of the investigation and prompt regulators to further clarify actions. BIS’ responses may also inform any potential legal challenge should a final action be adopted.
The notices highlight that BIS is especially interested in comments that directly address the regulatory criteria for determining the effects of imports on national security:
- For the pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients investigation, the notice states that comments addressing the regulatory criteria could include answering questions related to: "(i) the current and projected demand for pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients in the United States; (ii) the extent to which domestic production of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients can meet domestic demand; (iii) the role of foreign supply chains, particularly of major exporters, in meeting United States demand for pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients; (iv) the concentration of United States imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients from a small number of suppliers and the associated risks; (v) the impact of foreign government subsidies and predatory trade practices on United States pharmaceuticals industry competitiveness; (vi) the economic impact of artificially suppressed prices of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients due to foreign unfair trade practices and state-sponsored overproduction; (vii) the potential for export restrictions by foreign nations, including the ability of foreign nations to weaponize their control over pharmaceuticals supplies; (viii) the feasibility of increasing domestic capacity for pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients to reduce import reliance; (ix) the impact of current trade policies on domestic production of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, and whether additional measures, including tariffs or quotas, are necessary to protect national security; and (x) any other relevant factors."
- For the semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment investigation, the notice states that comments addressing the regulatory criteria could include answering questions related to: "(i) the current and projected demand for semiconductors (including as embedded in downstream products) and SME in the United States, differentiated by product type and node size; (ii) the extent to which domestic production of semiconductors can or is expected to be able to meet domestic demand at each node size for each product type, and similarly the extent to which domestic production of SME can or is expected to be able to meet domestic demand; (iii) the role of foreign fabrication and assembly, test and packaging facilities in meeting United States semiconductors demand, and similarly the role of foreign supply of SME in meeting domestic demand; (iv) the concentration of United States semiconductors imports (including as embedded in downstream products) from a small number of fabrication facilities and the associated risks, and similarly the concentration of United States SME imports from a small number of foreign sources; (v) the impact of foreign government subsidies and predatory trade practices on United States semiconductor and SME industry competitiveness; (vi) the economic or financial impact of artificially suppressed semiconductor and SME prices due to foreign unfair trade practices and state-sponsored overcapacity; (vii) the potential for export restrictions by foreign nations, including the ability of foreign nations to weaponize their control over semiconductors and SME supply chains; (viii) the feasibility of increasing domestic semiconductors capacity (in different product types and node sizes) to reduce import reliance, and similarly the feasibility of increasing domestic SME capacity to reduce import reliance; (ix) the impact of current trade and other policies on domestic semiconductor and SME production and capacity, and whether additional measures, including tariffs or quotas, are necessary to protect national security; (x) what product types and node sizes could be built only using SME from U.S. companies; (xi) what SME is manufactured abroad and faces limited competition from U.S.-made products; (xii) what SME parts or components are only available outside the United States; (xiii) where the U.S. workforce faces a talent gap in production of semiconductors, SME or SME components; and (xiv) any other relevant factors."
The BIS notices do not mention any prospective public hearings for either of the investigations (public hearings are discretionary for Section 232 investigations). During the first Trump administration and the Biden administration, BIS held public hearings for the steel, aluminum, and automotive imports investigations, but did not hold hearings for the later investigations targeting uranium, titanium sponge, vanadium, permanent magnets, and power transformer components. BIS cited either the small sizes of those industries or the COVID-19 lockdowns as justifications for not holding hearings, choosing to circulate surveys to industry participants instead. The two new notices do not explain why BIS has not scheduled hearings and do not state whether BIS is planning to issue surveys as a substitute (though BIS may provide more information on these plans in future updates). BIS also bypassed public hearings in the new copper and timber, lumber, and wood products investigations, for which public comments closed on April 1.4
The Trump administration’s Section 232 tariffs
In recent weeks, the Trump administration has appeared to move towards a two-track tariff strategy, imposing (i) "baseline" and "reciprocal" tariffs on most products from most countries under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), apparently seeking to negotiate more favorable market access conditions in return for the lifting of the tariffs;5 and (ii) Section 232 tariffs on imports associated with industries the Trump administration views as strategically important. Unlike most other tariffs President Trump has imposed, the “baseline” and “reciprocal” tariffs and Section 232 tariffs do not stack on top of each other. Instead, products affected by Section 232 tariffs are exempt from the "baseline" and "reciprocal" tariffs.
The pharmaceutical and semiconductor Section 232 investigations are the latest in a series of sector-specific tariff actions. Since taking office on January 20, President Trump has expanded the Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum; revived a Section 232 investigation from his first term to impose tariffs on imports of passenger vehicles, light trucks, and certain automotive parts; ordered the initiation of a new Section 232 investigation on imports of copper and copper derivative products; and ordered the initiation of a new Section 232 investigation on imports of timber, lumber, and wood products. Trump administration officials have also recently mentioned plans to initiate a Section 232 investigation targeting certain critical minerals.6
During his first term as president, Trump offered opportunities for importers to seek exemptions from Section 232 tariffs under certain circumstances. A few countries were also able to negotiate national exemptions. So far, the Trump administration has signaled it does not intend to offer similar exemptions again. The new expansion of the steel and aluminum tariffs included the revocation of all national and product specific exemptions granted under Trump’s first term and under the Biden administration. That said, Trump has begun suggesting that he may be considering moving to a more flexible approach. On April 14, he said that he is discussing temporary exclusions from the automotive tariffs with industry executives, but did not provide any details. Industry groups and concerned members of Congress will likely continue to pressure the Trump administration to be more receptive to such exclusion requests, but the outcome of these efforts is uncertain.
1 "Notice of Request for Public Comments on Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Pharmaceuticals and Pharmaceutical Ingredients," 90 FR 15951 (April 16, 2025).
2 "Notice of Request for Public Comments on Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Semiconductors and Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment," 90 FR 15950 (April 16, 2025).
3 19 U.S.C. §1862; and 15 C.F.R. part 705. More information on BIS’ Section 232 activities can be found on the BIS website.
4 "Notice of Request for Public Comments on Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Copper," 90 FR 11940 (March 13, 2025); and "Notice of Request for Public Comments on Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Timber and Lumber," 90 FR 11941 (March 13, 2025).
5 Executive Order 14257 of April 2, 2025: "Regulating Imports With a Reciprocal Tariff To Rectify Trade Practices That Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits," 90 FR 15041 (April 7, 2025).
6 See, “Chapter 17. Identification of New Section 232 Actions” of the "Report to the President on the America First Trade Policy Executive Summary," April 3, 2025.
