Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · BILL · 119th Congress · S. 3566 (Introduced in Senate) — To withdraw normal trade relations treatment with respect to the People's Republic of China, and for other purposes. · Sec. 2

Sec. 2. Findings

753 words·~3 min read·/bill/119/s/3566/is/section-2

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Congress finds the following: From 1980 until the passage of the U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 ( 22 U.S.C. 6911 et seq. ), the United States granted permanent normal trade relations status to the People’s Republic of China, contingent on an annual review pursuant to section 402 of the Trade Act of 1974 ( 19 U.S.C. 2432 ). The receipt by the People's Republic of China of permanent normal trade relations status, concurrent with its ascension to the World Trade Organization in 2001, was contingent on its adherence to several commitments, including transitioning towards a more market-oriented economy, protecting intellectual property, ensuring non-discrimination against foreign entities in trade matters, and ending export and production subsidies.
However, the People’s Republic of China has repeatedly and objectively violated each and every one of those commitments. Evasion by the People's Republic of China of tariffs imposed by the United States cost the economy of the United States approximately $130,000,000,000 in 2023 alone, and concurrently the People's Republic of China chose to impose exceedingly high tariffs, non-tariff barriers, and other regulatory hurdles on businesses in the United States. According to the United States Trade Representative, the People's Republic of China remains a priority watch list country for intellectual property theft and has stolen between $180,000,000,000 and $540,000,000,000 annually from the United States economy through theft of intellectual property, trade secrets, business processes, and technologies.
The People's Republic of China continues a systemic program of top-down industrial planning through heavy subsidization of domestic industries, prioritizing the protection of state-owned enterprises and a dual-pricing scheme that has left industries in the United States unable to effectively and fairly compete. According to a 2022 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the People's Republic of China offered as much as $407,000,000,000 in de facto subsidies to its domestic industries in 2019.
While the People's Republic of China subsidizes its industries in violation of its commitments under the World Trade Organization, it has already failed to comply with yet another major trade agreement—the Economic and Trade Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, signed on January 15, 2020, in which the People's Republic of China pledged to purchase an additional $200,000,000,000 in United States goods and services by the end of 2021.
The People's Republic of China failed to meet that deadline and fell short of its pledged commitment by 60 percent for goods. According to the United States Trade Representative, from 1994 through April 2025, the United States lost 5,000,000 manufacturing jobs and 90,000 factories. The world manufacturing output share of the United States declined from 28 percent in 2001 to 17 percent in 2024. In the fourth quarter of 2024, United States manufacturing as a share of gross domestic product was at a 20-year low.
At the same time, the economy of the People's Republic of China grew from the world’s sixth largest economy in 2001 to the second largest in 2025. In October 2025, the People's Republic of China threatened to hold the world hostage through broad export controls over the rare earths supply chain, spanning mining, refining, and manufacturing. The United States once held global dominance in rare earths but gradually surrendered by yielding to environmental pressure campaigns and an increasingly onerous regulatory regime.
Under article XXI of GATT 1994 (as defined in section 2 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act ( 19 U.S.C. 3501 )), countries may act for the protection of their essential security interests without breaching their obligations under the World Trade Organization. The relentless assault by the People's Republic of China on the economic security of the United States through industrial espionage, forced technology transfers, and the systematic erosion of the domestic manufacturing base of the United States directly undermines the ability of the United States to sustain its industrial capacity.
Those economic attacks, compounded by broader acts of aggression, such as military expansion in the South China Sea and egregious human rights abuses, constitute a comprehensive, ongoing, and grave threat to the national security interests of the United States. Accordingly, the behavior by the People's Republic of China merits the invocation of article XXI and Congress should therefore invoke that principle by revoking permanent normal trade relations status for the People's Republic of China to defend the strategic and economic security of the United States.
In 2022, members of the World Trade Organization similarly invoked article XXI to revoke permanent normal trade relations status for the Russian Federation.
Connectionstraces to 3
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.